Green Energy and Technology

Salvatore Giuffrida ·
Maria Rosa Trovato · Paolo Rosato ·
Enrico Fattinnanzi · Alessandra Oppio ·
Simona Chiodo Editors

Science
of Valuations
Natural Structures, Technological
Infrastructures, Cultural Superstructures
Green Energy and Technology
Climate change, environmental impact and the limited natural resources urge scien-
tific research and novel technical solutions. The monograph series Green Energy
and Technology serves as a publishing platform for scientific and technological
approaches to “green”—i.e. environmentally friendly and sustainable—technolo-
gies. While a focus lies on energy and power supply, it also covers “green” solu-
tions in industrial engineering and engineering design. Green Energy and Tech-
nology addresses researchers, advanced students, technical consultants as well as
decision makers in industries and politics. Hence, the level of presentation spans
from instructional to highly technical.
**Indexed in Scopus**.
**Indexed in Ei Compendex**.
Salvatore Giuffrida · Maria Rosa Trovato ·
Paolo Rosato · Enrico Fattinnanzi ·
Alessandra Oppio · Simona Chiodo
Editors

Science of Valuations
Natural Structures, Technological
Infrastructures, Cultural Superstructures
Editors
Salvatore Giuffrida Maria Rosa Trovato
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
and Architecture and Architecture
University of Catania University of Catania
Catania, Italy Catania, Italy

Paolo Rosato Enrico Fattinnanzi

DIA Rome, Italy
University of Trieste
Trieste, Italy Simona Chiodo
DASTU
Alessandra Oppio Politecnico di Milano
DASTU Milano, Italy
Politecnico di Milano
Milano, Italy

ISSN 1865-3529 ISSN 1865-3537 (electronic)

Green Energy and Technology
ISBN 978-3-031-53708-0 ISBN 978-3-031-53709-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2024

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Paper in this product is recyclable.

Contents

Valuation Science: Judgement, Value, and Truth

Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Simona Chiodo, Enrico Fattinnanzi, Salvatore Giuffrida,
Alessandra Oppio, Paolo Rosato, and Maria Rosa Trovato
Appraisal: Some Considerations from the Past and a Challenge
for the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Paolo Rosato
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Salvatore Giuffrida and Maria Rosa Trovato
The Inextricability of Fact and Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Massimo Dell’Utri
The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes an Estimate True? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Stefano Caputo
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Franca D’Agostini
Values and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Domenico Patassini

Valuation and Values: Earth and the Cities

The Value Creation in Our “Regime D’historicité” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Giulia Sonetti and Patrizia Lombardi
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System . . . . . . . . . 117
Maria Rosa Trovato
The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate
Values and the Development of Italian Metropolitan Cities . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Ezio Micelli and Eleonora Righetto

v
vi Contents

The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few

Theoretical-Methodological Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Vincenzo Bentivegna and Marta Berni
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational
Solidarity and Economic Feasibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Grazia Napoli
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Giovanna Acampa, Mariolina Grasso, and Claudia Mariaserena Parisi

Value Bearers: Heuristic and Normativity

Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic
Environmental Assessment (SEA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Giulio Mondini, Vanessa Assumma, Marta Bottero, Caterina Caprioli,
Giulia Datola, and Federico Dell’Anna
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation?
From the Property Tax on Bolted Systems to the Upheaval
of Compensation for Civic Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
Manuela Rebaudengo and Riccardo Roscelli
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation . . . . . . 227
Giovanna Acampa and Giorgia Marino
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs:
A Comparison at National Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Leopoldo Sdino, Fabiana Forte, and Paolo Rosasco
Oligopsony Hypothesis in the Real Estate Market. Supply
Fragmentation and Demand Reduction in the Economic Crisis . . . . . . . . 265
Pierluigi Morano, Francesca Salvo, Manuela De Ruggiero,
Francesco Tajani, and Daniela Tavano
How Many Data for a Reliable Assessment? Accuracy of Models
and Number of Comparables in Automated Valuation Models
(AVMs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Agostino Valier
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing
the Natural Component Incidence on the Housing Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Maria Rosaria Guarini, Francesco Sica, Debora Anelli,
and Pierluigi Morano

Valuation Between Rules and Creativity

Is It Worth Investing in Green Real Estate? Empirical Evidence
in the Office Sector of Milan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
Alessia Mangialardo and Ezio Micelli
Contents vii

Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability

Assessment: An Experiment Based on an Urban Regeneration
Programme in Northern Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
Marta Bottero, Chiara D’Alpaos, and Alessandra Oppio
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development.
Collaborative Decision-Making Processes for the Promotion
of Resilient Landscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
Lucia Della Spina and Claudia Giorno
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable
Redevelopment Scenarios: Including Local Communities’
Multiple Values in the Decision-Making Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
Cristina Coscia, Giulia Lazzari, and Irene Rubino
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network
Strategy of Cultural Heritage Enhancement: The Co-HEva
Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
Maria Cerreta, Ludovica La Rocca, and Vincenza Solli
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement
and Management of Existing Property Assets: The Case
of Torrevecchia Complex (Rome) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
Francesco Tajani, Pierluigi Morano, Spartaco Paris, and Felicia Di Liddo
Valuation Science: Judgement, Value,
and Truth
Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science

Simona Chiodo, Enrico Fattinnanzi, Salvatore Giuffrida, Alessandra Oppio,

Paolo Rosato, and Maria Rosa Trovato

Abstract This introductory contribution indicates some of the main prospects of

the SIEV 2019 Conference held at the Syracuse campus of the University of Catania
(Italy), addressed to the relationship between the fundamentals of the science of
evaluations that inspire the main issues with respect to which scholars and experts
delimit and characterise their civil commitment in research, education, and field
activity. The paper is divided into four sections. The first provides some reference
points on the importance of value judgement in terms of the (linguistic and ethical)
categories it coordinates, and thus the constitutive capacity it assumes in the reform
of the home-city-landscape system, starting from a reconsideration of the founda-
tions of the science of evaluation. The second proposes a comparison, and possible
convergence, between two different ways—one “conservative”, the other “progres-
sive”—of conceiving the interdisciplinary nature of valuation science in the prospect
of its enrichment and progressive adaptation to the challenges of contemporaneity.
The third section proposes the philosophical arguments underlying one of the main
issues of the science of value and valuations, the search for a unique value substance,
in this case beauty, capable of subsuming the entire spectrum of the authentic values
that specify it and constitute the primary reference of valuations. The fourth section

S. Chiodo · S. Giuffrida (B) · A. Oppio

DASTU, Polytechnic University of Milan, Milan, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
S. Chiodo
e-mail: [email protected]
A. Oppio
e-mail: [email protected]
E. Fattinnanzi
Viale Trastevere 26, Rome, Italy
M. R. Trovato
DICAR, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Rosato
DIA, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 3

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_1
4 S. Chiodo et al.

concludes this contribution by indicating—starting from some assumptions of project

epistemology—not only the role of evaluation, but also the potentialities and respon-
sibilities that in the synthesis of evaluators’ and designers’ expertise characterise the
commitment to the formation of orderly and flourishing communities.

Keywords Valuation fundamentals · Value essences · Disciplinary paradigms ·

Interdisciplinarity · Evaluation as a project prospect

1 This Conference. Some Disciplinary Ambitions

The purpose of this conference stems from the need to relaunch the debate on the
nature of Appraisal—and therefore on its relevance and prospects—in a climate of
profound transformation of the operational spheres in which value judgement, just
because and to the extent that it addresses fundamental issues of civil coexistence,
requires solid references to that reality that fills the coordinated and finalised set of
its statements with truth.
A reality to be sought—rather than observed—to be delimited and identified
by those practising the science of evaluations distinguishing between “truth” and
“accuracy”, and focusing on the role and meaning of evaluations in the formation of
orderly communities.
It should be mentioned that the proposal for a “Science of Valuations”, i.e., to place
Appraisal at the apex of the hierarchy of knowledge, was put forward by Rizzo [19]
in the face of the need to interpret the environmental issue as a challenge to include
and redefine “the science of valuations”; subsequently [20], with the proposal of a
“new theory of value based on the creative combination of matter, energy and infor-
mation”, he defined the epistemological framework of the renewal of the discipline
that inspired this conference in its reference to the notion of information as “shape”
and therefore “structure”. Finally, its threefold operational reference (natural struc-
tures, technological infrastructures, and cultural superstructures) places this Science
of Valuation in the concrete and more consistent sphere of the sciences of the terri-
tory, to avoid misunderstandings of genericity. But the most significant aspect of this
concreteness lies in the fact that the shapes of nature, technology and culture are
the stable and enduring presences in which a substantial part of the social product
surplus is condensed and represented. This has three fundamental implications.
The first lies in the approach of the evaluator (as a subject) who, inspired by the
original question of value, shares responsibility for the care of this social capital by
acting impartially on the one hand, and in a non-neutral manner on the other.
The second concerns the consequent choice of value substance, i.e. the contents
of the valuation that are associated with the fates of this social capital in an attempt
to highlight the motivations for its preservation and/or transformation; this substance
refers to apical and unamendable values—truth, beauty, justice, goodness—that are
subsequently specified and contextualized.
Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science 5

The third concerns the choice of topics of research, favouring the most relevant to
issues involving apex values and which, in the light of the prospects implied therein,
provide the valuational interpretation of facts and processes.
This leads to reflections on the need for an approach based on values rather
than prices; the latter may rather constitute a conventional and contingent measure
of values, since the constitutive imperfection of markets, especially in the field of
indivisible and scarcely reproducible goods, leads to instability of the economic
system and to extensive distributive inequities that are certainly not impersonal and
involuntary.
Among the main assumptions of Appraisal, those that have traditionally defined
its scientific profile have focused on the one hand, on affirming the evaluator’s third
party status, and, on the other, his/her neutrality.
Regarding the impartiality and non-neutrality of the evaluation, it should be
emphasised that the former is implicit in the public relevance of the value judgement
and concerns the method and instruments used to ensure the internal and external
consistency of the evaluation. This aspect upholds the objectivity of the evaluation
and refers any evaluation to evidence.
The second issue, on the other hand, concerns the content of the value judgement
and also its implicit procedural and decision-making dimension: in fact, even the
appraisal of a piece of real estate at a given point in time implies a motivation and
therefore a decision, more or less cogent or explicit.
More generally, the goods and projects subject to evaluation are a constitutive part
of a socio-economic system and a precise development model, in which all values
involved have a specificity and, in most cases, describe and measure the importance
for many of what is chosen by a few. This circumstance cannot be ignored by those
responsible for assessing.
These issues of the vision and mission of valuation science emerge with particular
urgency in the current climate, in which the worsening environmental issue and its
merciless effects invade all spheres of human activity, influencing, and in opposite
directions, sensitivities and programmes.
The responsibility in this endeavour on the part of a “Science of Evaluations”
lies in recovering the “subject” and his/her functions, at all levels recognising his/
her capacity to act “in reason and truth” and directing his/her agency towards the
convergence of multiple individual axiologies in the one ethical dimension—“the
due from each to all”—that fully realises his/her freedom.
This primacy of the subject emerged in different forms and fields of application
during the in-depth and frank debate developed at this meeting. Here, different posi-
tions confronted each other regarding the placement of evaluation in the broad spec-
trum of quantitative and/or qualitative, financial and/or economic, expertise-based
and/or participatory, market-based or regulatory approaches.
The other aspect involving the relevance of the individual subject for the
purposes of evaluation is the role of agents who have institutional responsibilities or
entrepreneurial capacities that can influence the course of events. This role cannot be
overlooked in evaluation: impartiality does not imply neutrality, rather, it is sustained
on non-neutrality.
6 S. Chiodo et al.

The role of the subject has also been delineated in the dialectic between subjec-
tivity and objectivity of the value judgement, i.e. between the “objecthood” (being
the object) of the goods to be evaluated and the “subjecthood” (being the subject) of
the evaluator.
With regard to the status of the object, the importance of the interpretation of the
objects of judgement as value-bearers was emphasised, and because of the extent
to which they enter into a complementary relationship with the subject, which
acts economically on them (buys/sells, preserves/transforms), contributing to the
construction of an ordered reality or hindering this path.
As for the subject function, the evaluator’s ability to constructively interpret the
forms of social communication that determine costs, prices and choices was empha-
sised; these communicative forms are the superstructures through which the reality
of objects ascends to the rank of “reality of values”.
Natural reality takes us by surprise—“hits us”—since it precedes and surpasses
the mind, language and all forms of human communication; therefore, behaviour
and decisions are not motivated by its evidence, but rather by the species, intensity
and extent of its representation in the mind, language, social communication and
affective sphere: in a word, by its value.
The functions of value judgement, in the specific context of social communication,
select and circumscribe the immense, albeit deterministic “causal reality” within the
limits of the reduced, albeit indeterministic, “motivational reality”.
The reduction of causal into motivational reality is the main aspect of the civil
function of the science of evaluations as it grapples with the three fundamental places
where shape is given in the three dimensions of social communication relevant to us:
natural, technological, cultural.
Insofar as it is applied to a “weak content”, the value, judgement on the one
hand requires the “personal commitment to validity”, that “strength” that results in a
“belief”, on the other hand, in order to distinguish itself from faith—an “insufficient
belief”—it must have the “shape” that gives it the most far-reaching validity so as to
assume scientific value, that of the “sufficient belief”. The synthesis of this strength
and this shape is condensed in the recognition that “knowledge is belief in a true
proposition”.
Scientific knowledge of values rejects the forms of deep scepticism that have
tried to question the relationship between value and truth. It is inspired by a reality of
authentic and unamendable values, which, albeit in the broad spectrum in which they
are declined and contextualised, are to be assumed to support the universal principles
of social harmony, and the progress of these in extension, depth and constructive
adaptation.
This conference animated the discussion on how value judgement, in its premises,
implications and applications, represents to the social community the truth content
of the judgements that support the reform of the “home-city-landscape system”
as a relational structure constitutive of the functions of “dwelling, living together,
contemplating”.
Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science 7

2 Continuity and Discontinuity of the Estimative Paradigm

Starting from a discussion among multiple disciplines and knowledge systems, the
seminar held in Ortigia has encouraged a reflection upon the epistemological roots of
evaluation and the long-term validity of the appraisal paradigm against the challenges
posed by the ongoing socio-economic and cultural changes. Two main perspectives
offered controversial notions and point of views on the relationship between diverse
fields of knowledge: the first, that can be defined “conservative”, considers interdis-
ciplinarity as the result of interactions between disciplines, while the second, defined
as “progressive”, considers the integration between disciplines an essential trait of
the processes of knowledge definition and expansion. An attempt to reconcile these
apparently aporetic positions can be traced starting from a reasoning around the
notions of complexity, interdisciplinarity and evolution, examined below.
Complexity
Since the 1940s, complexity has been configured as a transversal challenge among
different fields of science, in a way that the concept of complexity does not have
its own epistemological status but it belongs to a wider discourse on science [22].
The awareness about the limits of knowledge poses under question the nature and
purpose of the scientific method, and pushes to rethink questions, problems and
objects through which scientific investigation is defined according to the Cartesian
tradition, thus opening up space for new needs of deuteron-learning [2].
Interdisciplinarity
The debate on the relationship between different disciplines, namely between fields
of knowledge characterized by specific problems and research methodologies [12],
is not new and, over time, it has produced a broad taxonomy of definitions char-
acterized by the lexical unit “disciplinarity”, as a common characteristic, and by
a plurality of prefixes (multi-, inter-, trans-), which modify its meaning [4]. The
polysemic lens, under which different interpretations of the relationship between
several disciplinary horizons can be observed, deserves some clarifications in order
to highlight its funding pillars. The concept of multi-disciplinarity refers to different
but contiguous disciplines, without any kind of connection among them, which is,
instead, the basis of the interaction that characterizes inter-disciplinarity. Connec-
tion between disciplines that goes as far as their integration towards the definition of
new disciplines beyond the boundaries of the constituent ones [16] in the notion of
trans-disciplinarity.
Evolution
Contemporary science, by reviewing the historical and evolutionary character of
knowledge, has placed under a new light the concepts of continuity and discontinuity.
Threshold effects, deconstructions, re-combinations of themes and research perspec-
tives undermine the conception of a linear and cumulative direction of science devel-
opment. Similarly, the idea that the transition between different scientific paradigms
is rooted on discontinuity has been intensely discussed and overcome in favor of
a vision in which interactions between paradigms, with its unavoidable tensions,
8 S. Chiodo et al.

outlines new spaces of knowledge. From an epistemological point of view, it is

a matter of understanding the transition between theories, tools, and dynamics of
knowledge changes, as well as the relationship between stages of knowledge [17].
According to this perspective, the acceptability of a theoretical advancement can be
framed within plural theoretical and disciplinary assumptions.
The extension of the abovementioned concepts to support the reflection on the
outcomes of the Conference contributes to outlining a scenario in which the conser-
vative and evolutionary opinion, from being considered mutually exclusive, can be
seen both as two arrows of the same bow [15]. In the current state of uncertainty
and post-normal scientific investigation [6], a clear delimitation of the knowledge
space of Appraisal and Evaluation appears to be urgent. Only by starting from a
clear statement of Appraisal and Evaluation field of interest, its logical structures
and research methods, it’s significant to identify generative interactions with other
areas of knowledge. It is in fact the object of study and research—market, space and
production processes [11]—that suggests tracing new research directions under a
co-disciplinary perspective [1]. The notion of co-disciplinarity seems to be the most
appropriate research point of view for describing how to cooperate for enriching the
meanings of the same object of study. On top of this, it is also promising for concep-
tual frameworks and value judgments formulation consistently with the multiple
operational instances posed by the current social and economic context.
Under such a perspective, the increasingly stable collaboration with Decision
Sciences can be considered as one of the potential expansions of Appraisal disci-
plinary frontiers in line with the anticipatory intuitions by Carlo Forte. In the
context of a clear European geography of research alliances, the conditions for co-
disciplinarity occur when our discipline does not restrict its domain within the limits
of an empiric approach based on the reductionist application of models. However,
co-disciplinary becomes possible when Appraisal assumes the role of identifying the
economic lens for opinions of value formulation of goods, projects and resources, as
an essential and generative step within the evaluation process. A reconsideration of
the axiomatization of the discipline of Appraisal and Valuation—coherently with its
genesis and its evolution—with respect to a place and time dependent value, which
includes tangible as well as intangible aspects, opens a promising field of theoret-
ical and operational discussion leading to a synthesis of the antithetical positions on
disciplinary boundaries and paradigms.

3 The Highest Value Perspectives of Valuation: Beauty

as a Social Meta-value

Why should we think of beauty as an essential value to address in the present time?
Indeed, beauty has experienced a dramatic crisis in the last two centuries, in
that it has moved from being considered as objective (and, thus, detectable and
shareable by individuals) to being subjective (and, thus, undetectable and unshareable
Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science 9

by individuals) for precise historical-philosophical reasons. Thus, beauty has ended

up not being thought of as essential value when it comes to judging artefacts in
general and architecture in particular and has been replaced by other kinds of values
(see at least [9, 18]), specifically more objectively measurable: it seems that the more
objectively measurable something is, the more valuable it is in our society.
Yet, there are key reasons why we should think of beauty as an essential value to
address in the present time even more than ever (which is one of the objectives of
our work).
Ancient philosophy masterfully teaches us that beauty is the aesthetic category
that can represent human identity, specifically ideal human identity, better than any
other aesthetic category (see at least [7]). More precisely, on the one hand, beauty
can represent human spatiotemporal identity. For instance, architectural spaces are
beautiful if they can represent humans’ spatial and temporal characteristics, starting
with their frontal, and not side, view (it is no coincidence that symmetry is frequently
judged more beautiful than asymmetry), their two arms and their two legs that move
in a precise way. On the other hand, beauty can represent the infinite complexity of
human emotional, intellectual and ethical identity. For instance, architectural spaces
are beautiful if they can represent humans’ constitutive aspiration to the evolution of
their status, from their emotional well-being to their thirst for knowledge to their thirst
for justice. As a case in point, we may judge our home as beautiful if it can represent
not only our spatiotemporality (for instance, our physical need of protection) but also
our emotional, intellectual and ethical aspiration to feeling protected as the kind of
intimacy that Virginia Wolf ingeniously defines as a space that is a room of one’s
own (see Wolf, [23]).
Thus, we may say that, if it is true that horses need coverings as their protective
spaces, it is also true that humans even need pyramids as their protective spaces,
i.e. to actually represent the infinite complexity of their identity—humans even need
superfluous details to actually represent the idea according to which human identity
far exceeds what is necessary, i.e. basic needs, in that it constitutively includes what
is superfluous, i.e. aspirations to evolutions (which also means that, if our home and
city are beautiful, they can not only make us express who we are in the present but
also, and especially, make us evolve in the future by showing us who we can ideally
be).
If it makes sense, we should do our best to rethink of beauty as an essential
value which is both aesthetic and ethical (see [3, 5, 8, 13, 14, 21]). Indeed, it is
not necessary to consider the modern and contemporary shift from objective beauty
to subjective beauty as a fall into extreme relativism, which makes beauty a useless
value, and even a disvalue, when it comes to judging, in that it is not measurable (and,
thus, detectable and sharable). Conversely, we should be capable of rethinking of
beauty as an intersubjective, and consequentially expendable, value in a community
of individuals requested to make crucial decisions on the destiny of their living
spaces, both natural and artefactual, specifically architectural (see [10]).
Also, the intersubjectivity of beauty may lead us to dialogue, starting with
comparing our judgments, which may be remarkably different. And speaking of
dialogue means speaking of a further ethical dimension of beauty as a value. Indeed,
10 S. Chiodo et al.

the comparison of our intersubjective judgments makes us exercise and, conse-

quently, strengthen our social capabilities, in that we should be capable of listening,
mediating and even changing our initial judgments—we may say that beauty may
lead us to be a community of individuals who are capable of both mutual respect
and, especially, using their differences as precious opportunities to perfect their initial
judgments.
Thus, one of the worst mistakes we may make is to think of beauty as a luxury
for the living spaces of privileged individuals—conversely, it is essential, and even
urgent, to rethink of beauty as a kind of norm for the living spaces of any individual,
since it shapes the idea according to which we are equally humans and, as humans,
we constitutively share more than what we do not share, starting with what beauty
represents as our shared human identity.
If it makes sense, it should not be hard to understand that a city deprived of beauty
is not ethical and, especially, cannot express our ethical identity and even make it
evolve. Indeed, a city deprived of beauty represents us as incapable of evolving
and, consequently, is the living space through which we repeatedly learn to think of
ourselves as incapable of being better than we are. And, finally, we act accordingly,
both as individuals and as a community of individuals.

4 Conclusions as Prospects. Operational Achievements

of Discussing on Values and Valuations

With this introduction, we aim to highlight a number of important aspects which,

whether present at various levels of awareness, are very different. Sometimes explic-
itly, in many cases more or less unconsciously, they seem to us to be useful as impor-
tant potentials for addressing crucial demands that, in the current difficult situation,
are being placed on our discipline, moreover in increasingly explicit forms.
First of all, when evaluating this approach, it should be borne in mind that the
Syracuse conference took place shortly before the outbreak of the pandemic. The
years that followed were marked by a serious economic and social crisis not only in
Italy but also in Europe and internationally, which was then aggravated by the war
of invasion of Ukraine. These aspects of the current situation prompt us to reflect
deeply on what our current disciplinary responsibilities are, both in the academic
and professional fields, in which different disciplinary orientations are required, but
which are in any case capable of producing adequate answers to the questions that
are concretely put to us.
In this difficult situation, one of the few positive aspects that, in recent times, could
represent a first concrete response to the crisis in Italy, is certainly represented by the
possibility of using the large resources allocated by the NRPP, the National Recovery
and Resilience Plan. Resources that, however, must be used in a very short time and
pursuing the precise goals indicated some time earlier by the programme drawn
Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science 11

up beforehand by the European Community, significantly named “Next Generation

EU”.
Most of these resources were earmarked for the realisation of a huge programme
of Public Works, i.e. for a sector in which the greatest scientific and professional
interests of architects and engineers, i.e. of the largest share of our members, lie.
However, the criteria and procedural processes through which these resources are
to be used have been defined by the recent new Procurement Code, in which the
most important aspect is the establishment of the figure of the SPM: Single Project
Manager.
For the first time in Italy, in a regulation aimed at the realisation of public works,
attention is paid to a higher quality of works, therefore to their design.
In order to meet this need, a figure is created who is assigned important functions
in the governance of all project drafting phases. It is also stated that these functions are
to be performed by professionals with special skills, and these are clearly indicated
in the text itself. Here, the most interesting aspect is that the skills indicated, for an
important part, are fully in line with those that, in recent years, have increasingly
characterised and qualified the field of valuation and assessment included in the
training of architects and construction engineers.
It is interesting to note how in Syracuse, in the illustration of the scientific and
professional research activities and, above all, in the debate that developed in the
various areas into which the speeches were divided, it is possible to identify the
emergence of important issues which, we repeat, are unconscious and not sufficiently
explicit. These are problems that have become essential in the current situation. In
particular, those relating to a more aware and effective methodological and opera-
tional positioning of the tools that the estimative and valuation disciplines can offer
within the drafting processes of plans and projects.
Firstly, an awareness emerges that in order to address the problem of possible
evaluations of spatial organisation, it is necessary to consider not only the current
physical space, but also that which may result from its future evolution generated
by the interaction with the economic and social space. It therefore seems to us
very positive that, in many of the contributions presented, there has been a greater
awareness of the importance of these interactions, and hence a growing tendency to
develop an interdisciplinary dimension in one’s work.
We can consider this interdisciplinary vision a positive contribution that has quali-
fied the discipline of estimation and evaluation for the study, analysis and intervention
in cities and territories.
In these papers, a remarkable willingness and ability to understand, to dialogue
with and use the contributions from other disciplines in one’s own work emerges,
showing how it is possible to use them without abdicating or obscuring one’s own
cultural characterisations as a manager of spatial structures, and indicating how it
is possible to capture elements from those disciplines with which to dialogue and
collaborate.
A further fundamental point emerging is the need to use evaluation as the tool
that most effectively qualifies one’s professionalism with the inclusion of conceptual
12 S. Chiodo et al.

and operational methodologies introduced by contemporary epistemology. Develop-

ments that have affected design drafting methodologies but are still too embryonic in
the design of works, particularly those to which an architectural attribute is or should
be assigned.
Primarily, it is necessary to achieve a fundamental awareness that there are impor-
tant correlations between certain elements that characterise scientific research and
the drafting of a plan or a project.
A brief comment on these correspondences is that their acquisition enables
methodological and operational potential to be strengthened. Epistemology indi-
cates, in the formulation of theoretical hypotheses, the operation underlying the
major developments in contemporary science.
Theoretical hypotheses that have solicited the development of rigorous research
activities which, even with the setting-up and use of structures and powerful equip-
ment, have often enabled their validation and definitive formulation after several
decades.
We can see that even the drafting of any urban plan or project, no matter what
its type or size, always starts from the initial formulation of one or more hypotheses
of “spatial structures” that, by fitting into a pre-existing urban/territorial reality, are
hypothesised to satisfy, as far as possible, those same needs that had generated the
initiation of that plan or project.
The process through which this theoretical hypothesis is generated has an essen-
tially subjective and intuitive character that is therefore rooted in the patrimony of
acquired knowledge and value judgements, in particular in the critical knowledge of
the reality in which one is operating. Then, similarly to what is practised in research,
the process of drafting development (the generating idea) will make it possible either
to reject the hypothesis or to guide the development of a design, based on the contin-
uous assessment of the level of satisfaction of the needs that had required its drafting,
taking into account the time and resources that its implementation requires.
The result of the final drafting work will be all the more positive the more rigorous
and coherent the development of the decision-making and choice process, through
which the actual drafting is then articulated. This is especially true when the many
complex decisions and choices that are gradually made can contribute to the final
result. This will be possible if we assume the concept that the drafting of a plan or
project constitutes a “decision-making process”. This firm assumption allows us to
study and understand the different aspects of the process in order to make it more
effective.
In particular, it is just on the basis of this acquisition that we can identify the role
that the inclusion of evaluation tools in the drafting processes can and must play.
Note, not an inclusion alongside or on top of the development of drafting processes,
but an organic incorporation as an essential and qualifying component of the drafting
processes themselves.
Evaluation tools whose design, while using approaches and methods inherited
from historical disciplines, as indicated by some of the contributions presented here in
Syracuse, must have an innovative conception that makes them capable of supporting
innovative drafting processes.
Issues and Prospects of Valuation Science 13

Firstly, it is necessary to assess the capacity of each element introduced to

contribute to the concretisation of the initially hypothesised spatial structure. This
assessment must be referred both to its specific qualities and to its capacity to
contribute to the final configuration coherently with the specific characteristics of
the initial generating idea.
Finally, the extent to which individual decisions and choices contribute to
achieving important objectives of a general nature, e.g. on the containment of energy
consumption, or capable to contributing to the green and digital revolution, must be
assessed.
These reflections solicit a further commitment to the construction and develop-
ment of evaluation tools capable to support participatory processes of users and all
those involved in the activation of that plan or project. The experiences conducted so
far in this important sector of activity testify to the relevance of the involvement of
a further range of specialists, for example psychologists and sociologists, who offer
us the possibility of getting to know and considering, in our work as planners and
designers, the particular modality of the use of spatial structures.

References

1. Blanchard-Laville C (2000) De la co-disciplinarité en sciences de l’éducation, in http://www.

persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rfp_0556-7807_2000_num_132_1_1033. [15/04/
2014]
2. Ceruti M (1985) Epistemologia genetica ed epistemologia naturale. In: Piaget J, Garcia R
(1985) Psicogenesi e storia delle scienze, Garzanti, Milano, pp 7–18
3. Chiodo S (2015) La bellezza Un’introduzione al suo passato e una proposta per il suo futuro,
Milano-Torino: Bruno Mondadori
4. Cini M (2017) Oltre la disciplinarità: le Humanities al confronto con le altre scienze. In: Cini
M (a cura di) Humanities e altre scienze. Superare la disciplinarità. Carocci, Roma, pp 23–48
5. Danto A (1994) Beauty and morality, In: Id., Embodied meanings. Critical essays and aesthetic
meditations. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, pp 363–375
6. Funtowicz S, Ravetz JR (1994) The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal
science. Ecol Econ 10(3):197–207
7. Gadamer HG (1986) The relevance of the beautiful and other essays (trans Walker N). In:
Bernasconi R (ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
8. Guyer P (2005) Values of beauty: historical essays in aesthetics. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge-New York
9. Hickey D (2009) The invisible dragon. Essays on beauty, revised and expanded. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press
10. Kant I (2000) Critique of the power of judgment (1790). In: Guyer P (ed) Cambridge-New
York: Cambridge University Press
11. Micelli E (2019) Mercato, tecnologie, spazio. L’estimo e le direttrici del suo sviluppo,
Relazione introduttiva al Convegno Scienza delle Valutazioni. Strutture naturali, infrastrutture
tecnologiche, sovrastrutture culturali, Ortigia, 11–12 luglio 2019
12. Morin E (1994) Sur l’interdisciplinarité. In: Bulletin Interactif du Centre International de
Recherches et études transdiciplinaires
13. Mothersill M (1984) Beauty restored. Clarendon Press, Oxford
14. Nehamas A (2007) Only a promise of happiness: the place of beauty in a world of art. Princeton
University Press, Princeton
14 S. Chiodo et al.

15. Nicolescu B (2006) Manifeste de la transdiciplinarité, Editions du Rocher, Monaco

16. OECD (1972) Interdisciplinarity: problems of teaching and research in universities. OECD,
Paris
17. Piaget J, Garcia R (1985) Psicogenesi e storia delle scienze. Garzanti, Milano
18. Preti G (1970) Possiamo fare a meno del bello?, in Id., Que será, será, Firenze: Il Fiorino
19. Rizzo F (1991) La questione ambientale: una sfida per ricomprendere e risignificare la scienza
delle valutazioni. In: Genio Rurale, n 12
20. Rizzo F (1999) Valore e valutazioni. La scienza dell’economia o l’economia della scienza.
FrancoAngeli, Milano
21. Scarry E (1999) On beauty and being just. Princeton University Press, Princeton
22. Stengers I (1985) “Perché non può esserci un paradigma della complessità” In: Bocchi G,
Ceruti M (a cura di) La sfida della complessità. Feltrinelli, Milano, pp 61–83
23. Woolf V (1998) A room of one’s own. In: Shiach M (ed) Oxford: Oxford University Press
Appraisal: Some Considerations
from the Past and a Challenge
for the Future

Paolo Rosato

Abstract This short note has the objective of stimulating a debate on the nature of
Appraisal in the light of the recent evolution of the evaluation procedures and of the
application areas. After a brief reference to the founding principles codified in the
last century, the capacity of statistical-quantitative procedures to replace the role of
“expertise” in evaluations is discussed. Finally, the note highlights how the discipline
defined by the classic texts of the middle of the last century is still current and effective
and that, more or less consciously, even the most recent scientific literature is placed
in the wake of the classical economic-estimative tradition.

Keyword Appraisal principles · Future challenge

1 Introduction

This short note aims to stimulate a critical debate among the experts on the current
state of the Appraisal discipline in Italy, recalling the founding principles and hoping
a critical review of the reference models, or at least a review of those models that have
been “fundamentals”, first theoretic and then methodological in the past century.

P. Rosato (B)
Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 15

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_2
16 P. Rosato

2 Some Pillars from the Past

Since the seminal contributions that appeared in the middle of last century,1 Appraisal
has developed by synthesizing the urgency of satisfying the real evaluation questions
posed by civil society and the need to acquire an adequate “theoretical corpus” to
support the methodological responses.
The analysis of the post-war scientific literature of the last century shows how
Appraisal academics have faced these questions, identifying, from time to time,
suitable methodological solutions and finding, among other things, points of effective
synthesis between theoretical rigor and operational efficiency, often hard to combine.
The paradigm that inspired many (not all) Italian scholars in the search for such
solutions, and on which most of the academics were trained, is the marginalist
neoclassical one, where value is formed in the market from the conflicting strategies
of supply and demand.
Historically, the assumption of this paradigm, as a fundamental core to the theo-
retical development of market valuations, derives from the belief that Appraisal is an
autonomous branch of Economics [5], and that the market is always able of directly
or indirectly providing the right information, so that it can express a robust value
judgment.
Leaving aside here the question of the valuation of “non-market” goods, which
requires a specific analysis, I believe that this assumption needs a meditation, also in
the context of the valuation of private goods, at least of the goods that are currently
of estimative interest.
The neoclassical approach to the equilibrium between supply and demand
provides a good interpretative key for the formation of real estate prices in various
markets, both competitive and non-competitive [12].
But is truly able of providing all the information necessary to formulate adequate
value judgments—for robustness—at the quality currently required by real estate
valuation standards [17]?
The answer can only be interlocutory, not so much for the limits of the neoclassical
approach in interpreting markets, but for the basic objective of Appraisal: looking
for the “most probable” value.
In this regard, “classical” manuals adopt comparison as an evaluation method and,
therefore, base the existence of a most probable value on the “Law of Indifference”
[7] or on the analogous “Law of One Price” [18] which implicitly assume a market
equilibrium [5].
Competitive and non-competitive markets characterised by a unique equilibrium
point (i.e.: perfect competition, monopoly), if active, provide sufficient information
to identify a value more likely than others. In this case, quantitative procedures for
real estate valuation disclosed in the last few decades [2, 16], which was also inspired
by consolidated practices in Anglo-Saxon countries, provide a useful support for the
objective identification of the “most probable” value. The problem arises when the

1 With reference to the best-known manuals, we note Serpieri [15], Medici [11], Di
Cocco [3], Famularo [4], Lo Bianco [10].
Appraisal: Some Considerations from the Past and a Challenge … 17

reference market is not very active, does not have a unique equilibrium point (bilateral
monopoly), and/or when the asset has specific characteristics.
Appraisal is useful, if not necessary, precisely for evaluating goods that “due to
their particular characteristics lack precise market references” [11, p. 1].
Appraisal, therefore, finds its mainspring in the valuation of “singularities”, a bril-
liant definition by Karpik [8, p. 13], where the main factors influencing the values are
“qualities” and not “quantities”, and the qualities are characterised by a considerable
uncertainty, both in their real consistency and in the perception by the subject acting
in the market.
In this situation, properties traded on the market are very different, both from each
other and from the one to be estimated, so much so that it substantially undermines
their comparability with other assets and where it is difficult to identify a value
more probable than others. For the so-called “singularities”, just starting from the
neoclassical paradigm, it must be recognised that there is no equilibrium price that is
more probable than others, but many, all equally possible due to the random encounter
between a fragmented and sporadic demand and supply.
These are the areas where the estimate, although understood as an objective inter-
pretation of the market where the good could be exchanged, takes the form of a
“storytelling” where the poor market data are intimately and substantially integrated
with the multiple hypothetical ones [3, p. 3].
They are also areas where the appraisal value, as “the result of a theoretical
proposition (logical, speculative) expressed in figures” [11, p. 5] is substantially
legitimised by the rigor of the logical argument and by the consensus of the experts
(general validity), and will hardly find confirmation from the statistical survey.

3 Some Suggestions for the Future

In the “singularities” appraisal, the sharing of the evaluation process and hypothetical
assumptions plays a fundamental role in legitimising the value judgment, and this
aspect is all the more important the more the asset has specific characteristics. In
other words, in the valuation of “singularities”, scientific estimation becomes “art”
and is mainly based on the expertise and skill of the appraiser. It should also be noted
that the surrogate role of expertise may also be necessary in the appraisal of ordinary
goods, traded in competitive markets, but on which there are little market data. In
fact, we can assume that we have an adequate representation of the market only with
the availability of a sufficient number of transactions to avoid the distortions caused
by random factors that always plague real markets, especially real estate. Otherwise,
there is no guarantee that the limited data available are sufficient to represent the
market where the asset could be traded. Unless the little amount of data are chosen
“appropriately” using the expertise.
In other words, with little market data, either one operates upstream with the
targeted choice of the data assumed in the valuation procedure, or one operates
downstream in the evaluation itself. In any case, it is always a question of resorting
18 P. Rosato

to experience: we might as well be transparent and not “hide” the expert judgment
in the subjective choice of market data.
The importance of integrating expert judgment into procedures, including quan-
titative ones, for estimating “singularities” dates back to the early 1990s [1] and has
been demonstrated in various empirical works. These researches demonstrated that
the performances of mass appraisal procedures based exclusively on market data
(regressions and neural networks) rapidly degraded with the reduction of the market
data used in model development, while those that also incorporated the experience
gained on the market by evaluators maintained good performances [9].
Now, the question that arises spontaneously: is it possible that quantitative proce-
dures can unequivocally resolve the issues raised above? That is, can the valuation
of “singularities” be solved by adopting standardised quantitative procedures?
I do not think it is possible because there is a logical contradiction involved. If
this were the case, it would mean that the data available on the market are sufficient
to describe all goods that can be exchanged there but, even knowing all transactions,
this would imply the non-existence of “singularities”. In all other cases, it must be
admitted that the knowledge of the market where the asset to be estimated could be
traded is undermined by a certain indeterminacy, as acutely observed by Realfonzo
[14, p. 17].
There remains the question, which is far from marginal, of making the contri-
bution of expertise to the valuation transparent as to share it and thus contribute to
the construction of valuation procedures of general validity. As mentioned before
Di Cocco [3, p. 3] with the distinction between “factual data” and “hypothetical
data” had already successfully intuited this need. Moreover, contributions appeared
already in the second half of the last century, especially in professional publications,
which suggested, in the absence of adequate information obtainable directly from
the market, coefficients representing the effect of particular characteristics on value
[6, 13].
However, this topic is still largely unexplored, especially with reference to the use
of modern techniques of stated preferences and big data analysis.
Personally, I believe that this is a research area where we can usefully synthesise
the in-depth theoretical analysis, which has so much engaged the best scholars of
Appraisal in the twentieth century, with the tools of data analysis and modelling of
economic phenomena currently available.
After all, these are the areas where Appraisal have to provide convincing answers,
since these responses are necessary.

References

1. Curto R (1994) L’ uso delle tecniche multi criteri come procedimenti pluriparametrici: il sistema
dei confronti multipli di Saaty, Genio Rurale, 9. Edagricole, Bologna
2. Del Giudice V (2015) Estimo e valutazione economica dei progetti. Paolo Loffredo Iniziative
Editoriali, Palermo
Appraisal: Some Considerations from the Past and a Challenge … 19

3. Di Cocco E (1960) La valutazione dei beni economici. Calderini, Bologna

4. Famularo N (1963) Teoria e pratica delle stime. UTET, Torino
5. Forte C (1968) Elementi di estimo urbano. Etas Kompass, Milano
6. Forte C, De Rossi B (1979) Principi di economia ed estimo. Etas Kompass, Milano
7. Jevons WS (1879) The theory of political economy, 2nd edn. Macmillan, London
8. Karpik L (2010) Valuing the unique. Princeton, Princeton University
9. Lisini L, Rosato P (2006) I metodi di analisi quantitativa nell’estimo immobiliare: una valu-
tazione comparata. In: Curto R, Stellin G (eds) Estimo e Valutazione. Metodologie e Casi di
studio, DEI Tipografia del Genio Civile. Roma
10. Lo Bianco G (1960) Estimo. Editore Ulderico Hoepli, Milano
11. Medici G (1972) Principi di Estimo. Calderini, Bologna
12. Mollica E (1994) L’analisi del mercato nella procedura di stime. Genio Rurale, 4. Edagricole,
Bologna
13. Orefice M (1984) Estimo. UTET, Torino
14. Realfonzo A (2015) Brevi note introduttive in Del Giudice V, Estimo e valutazione economica
dei progetti. Paolo Loffredo Iniziative Editoriali, Palermo, pp 17
15. Serpieri A (1950) La stima dei beni fondiari. Edizioni Agricole, Bologna
16. Simonotti M (2006) Metodi di stima immobiliare. Dario Flaccovio Editore, Palermo
17. AAVV (2018) Codice delle valutazioni immobiliari. Tecnoborsa, Roma
18. Walras L (1874) Principe d’une théorie mathématique de l’échange”, Séances et travaux de
l’Académie des sciences morales et politiques (Institut de France), Collection, 33e année,
nouvelle série, 101, tome I. Alphonse Picard, Paris
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil
Commitment

Salvatore Giuffrida and Maria Rosa Trovato

Abstract This contribution introduces some of the theoretical, methodological and

operational issues that value judgement science faces in the climate of the radical
anthropological, social, political and economic changes due to the progressive accen-
tuation and spread of the humanitarian, climate and energy crises. These issues
prompt the science of value judgement to further reflections on the meaning of the
content and on the validity of the evaluative statements, hence on their referents and
their representation in value measures consistent with the prospect of sharing the
planet’s resources and peoples’ destinies. The proposed considerations invite us to
go back and reflect on the foundations of Appraisal, which stands out for its original
reference to distributive justice, on which it bases its essential civil commitment.
The main aspects of a reflection on the fundamentals are: the conditions of truth of
the judgement; the elements of authenticity of its contents; the originally normative
nature of the valuation; its implicit prospective dimension; the relationship between
subject’s agency and social mechanisms’ impersonality through which the references
of the valuations—market prices and preference orders—are identified as the more
or less relevant terms of the value judgement.

Keywords Value · Truth · Judgement · Agency · Normativity

S. Giuffrida (B) · M. R. Trovato

Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
M. R. Trovato
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 21

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_3
22 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

1 Introduction. Valuation Science in the Human Space

The operational context within which the civil commitment of Appraisal is delimited
and specified is the broad spectrum of territorial sciences aimed at reforming the
home-city-landscape system. The latter is to be considered the orderly wholeness
of dwelling, living together, and contemplating the physical space that is constantly
reorganized by the evolution of the human relations.
This is the space investigated and recreated by the recurrence of valuations, the
reality of values, and which the discipline of valuation undertakes to represent in
order to reconstitute the uniqueness of valuation and decision that sustains the
personal and collective “becoming-subjects”, in the fair relationship between the
agency of the subject and the resilience of the objects.
No other status whether that of “Science of Valuations” would credit Appraisal
to make judgements across the broad spectrum of human living space: the reality
of values is in fact the substratum of the different ways in which preferences and
expectations float to the surface in the forms and measurements of costs and prices.
The latter perform the same function as language grappling with the concepts it
represents in the space of conventions and in the time of contingencies in which it
operates.
The use of monetary language makes the evaluation responsible for the most
adequate representation of the reality of values; conventions and contingencies are
its conditions of truth, rather than legitimisation of arbitrariness.
In economy, as in other forms of social communication, there is a constructive rela-
tionship between conventions (the space of preferences) and contingencies (the time
of expectations), the same that makes the rule constantly renewed by the exception.
Nevertheless, the “centrifugal” use of monetary language—like the “booh-hurrah
effect” (Caputo, infra) in mass communication—fosters a “price rhetoric” that acts
in two divergent ways: in a “conformative” sense it ostends authentic values in
the measurements of just prices; in a “deformative” sense it inflates (in the case
of euphoria) or deflates (in the case of panic) the economic values to the point of
triggering fluctuations in both the order of capitalist democracies and the harmony
of natural ecosystems.
In the practical sphere of these evidences the science of value and evaluations
claims a normative priority as much in the pursuit of value as the “fair price”, as in
supporting project by selecting the “authentic values” as the sensible contents of the
evaluative statement.
Scientific dignity and reference to an ethics of living space delimit the realm
of “evaluation as civil commitment”, which is synthesised in the blazon of our
discipline: the value judgement.
The science of valuation educates to attribute value judgements to public and private assets
and investment projects that are involved in the transformation processes of the home-city-
landscape system, which raise relevant issues of distributive justice.
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 23

This contribution provides an examination of value judgement in evaluation

science. Section 2 highlights the constructive function of judgement with reference to
its omnipresence in the cognitive and constructive activity of humans involved in the
evolution of orderly communities. Section 3 focuses on the main dimensions of value
as the original content of evaluation and the condition of its truth, indicating some
aspects of the relationship between absolutism and relativism of values. Section 4
addresses the overcoming of the oppositions between objectivity and subjectivity of
value judgements. Some concluding considerations in Section 5 specify sense and
essence of value in its representation by means of judgement.

2 Judgement

2.1 Some Premises

Judgement is a philosophical category having prominent linguistic implications,

since it is an utterance (or a group of them) with an ultimate value content: judgement
is meant, for our purposes, as “an expression of the faculty of distinguishing, eval-
uating, choosing, deciding. To have judgement means to be able to regulate oneself
well in making choices or to make them according to the best-established rules.
In this sense, judgement is qualified by the specific fields in which it acts: moral,
aesthetic, historical, political” [1]. The value judgement is therefore consolidated in
the attributes that are concretely relevant in order to “eliminate an uncertainty, settle
a dispute, resolve a conflict” (ib.). In this sense, the “value judgement” differs from
the “factual judgement” in having as its content a value, not a prediction, which is
rather the content of the latter.
The factual judgement can be taken as useful information to settle a dispute, but
it cannot therefore be assimilated to the value judgement insofar as it constitutes the
body of knowledge necessary for a subsequent and superordinate critical activity
with which the “evaluating subject” intentionally acts on reality by exercising his or
her “agency”.
According to St. Thomas, factual judgement and value judgement can be assimi-
lated in the “right determination of the just to the right determination of all things”
(ib.), that is, in the irreducible social subjectivity of the true, which re-establishes the
harmony between the human and its living space.
The two dimensions of judgement, facts and values—the first referring to a natural
reality, i.e. independent of the mind and language, the other to a social reality, there-
fore created on the basis of shared prospects and destinies, as the outcome of inter-
personal communication—are difficult to distinguish for two reasons: the distinction
between facts and values doesn’t implicate the opposition between observation and
evaluation [11]: true and just cannot be conflicting attributes (D’Agostini, infra).
24 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

Judgement is a cognitive formulation that has, “according to Meinong, an inten-

tional origin, in the belief that it is true or false, according to Pierce, a projective
nature as a representation to ourselves of the beliefs that support our actions” [1].
The nature of judgement as a cognitive activity having general validity consists,
according to Kant, in the “objective unity between distinct representations unified
through apperception, the logical function common to all thinking beings” (ib.).
The science of valuations investigates the ways in which social reality transcends
individual determination towards the collective agency. Concerning the role of the
subject in the value creation and in the value representation, Patassini addresses the
concept of “value in action” (infra), D’Agostini the concepts of “intentionality” or
“aboutness” (infra).

2.2 Etymology and Metaphorizations of “Judgement”

Some elements of the etymology of “judgement” and its evolution along the progres-
sive metaphorisation of its original meaning may be useful to recognise the density
of the evaluative experience and the consequent accountability, as well as the impor-
tance of the disciplinary connection that Appraisal maintains with this cognitive and
affective faculty.
The insights for this reflection come from the erudite and extensive examination
of the origin and evolution of “judgement” by one of the foremost experts on Greek
literature, Professor Emeritus Salvatore Nicosia [16].
He emphasises the omnipresence of judgement throughout the evolution of the
human’s practical and cognitive experience, and in the broadening of his commu-
nicative capacity. The concept of judgement is expressed by the verb krinein and by
the noun krisis, which identify the function of judging as a specifically human faculty.
The root -kri carries the meanings of “to separate”, “to resolve”, “to divide”, which
evolve into “to choose”, “to select”, “to interpret dreams” by discerning confused
and ambiguous signs, separating the true from the false.
Its efficacy in material culture—expressed in Latin as “cernere”, i.e. “sifting”
the grain from the straw until obtaining an edible fruit—has initiated a process of
metaphorisation that has extended its meaning to more abstract aspects, i.e. ethical
and cognitive, such as “to distinguish” and “to discern”, over which the meaning of
judging, “krinein”, prevails. From the latter comes “krisis”, meaning “judgement”
as an intellectual distinction on the basis of a qualitative criterion, but also “dispute”,
“resolution”, “outcome”.
Two derivatives are further relevant in estimation: the judgement as the result
of an evaluation by the “krités”; the “kriterion” used as a tool for discernment or
judgement parameter.
“Krima” means “decision”, “verdict” or “crime”; “criminal” is one who is found
guilty of a “crime” with a sentence of conviction. The noun “kritikos” denotes the
“critic”, the “scholar”, the “erudite”; “kritiké” is the discretionary faculty; “criticism”
is the art and science of judgement, an aspect that upholds its validity to the public.
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 25

The richness of this concept is also due to the multiple combinations of the root
with the prefixes that expand its meaning, founding in the judgement—not only in the
etymological sense, but also in the substantive sense—the implicit decision-making
value and the project prospect of the assessment.
Many combinations emphasise the idea of separation and disjunction: “ek-krino”
“secretion”, “excretion”, “excrement”; “apo-krino”—in Latin se-cretus—means
“secret”, “secluded”; “dia-krisis” means “discretion”, “discernment” in an intellec-
tual sense that presides over some basic functions of problem solving and information
organisation: “disaggregation”, “breakdown”.
Conversely, “sun-krisis” is “recomposition”, and in a broader sense, “syncretism”.
“Dia-krisis”, in Latin “discrimen”, i.e. line of demarcation, takes on negative
meanings in the sense of “discrimination”.
Dia-kritos—that which is distinguished, one who excels—also means “judi-
cious”, “endowed with discernment”; its opposite “a-dia-kritos”, i.e. “incapable of
discernment”, also takes on a moral connotation meaning one who is “indiscreet”,
disrespectful of confidentiality.
In the judicial sphere, “ana-krisis”, “pre-trial investigation” in view of subsequent
findings, concludes with “kata-krisis”, “the condemnation”; relevant here for our
purposes are the verb “pro-krino” and the noun “pro-krisis”, which indicate “to judge
in preference”, “to pre-select”, as well as “to judge before”, “to decide beforehand”,
“to pre-judge” and consequently “prejudice” and “preconceived opinion”.
The constitutive function of judgement, with regard to the relevance of the
agency of the judging subject in the decision-making processes, is sanctioned by
the prefix “epi-” “above”, from which “epi-krisis”, “decision”, “determination”, and
“epi-krima”, “decree”.
Separation and discernment are cognitive faculties that we resort to when faced
with confusing issues, which in evaluation depend on information incompleteness,
semantic and syntactic ambiguities, systemic uncertainty, polysemy (Patassini, infra).
In this regard, the prefix “upo-” supports one of the most advanced functions
of judgement: interpretation. “Upo-krisis”, in theatrical language means “acting”,
“playing”, “performance”, and there after “simulation”, “pretence”; the “upo-krites”
is the “actor” or “simulator”, and finally, to traslate, the “hypocrite”.
In summary,
The Greek krisis has been transformed [...] into a fundamental cognitive act of distinguishing
by grasping differences (and assimilating on the basis of analogies), of perceiving the specific
relationships between things and people, of attributing values, merits and responsibilities,
of sorting out chaotic confusion, of ordering and shaping the complexity of the world and
human life [... ] Judgement is a complex mental operation involving personal evaluation,
criteria, discretion, discernment [...] a laborious conquest of truth [16].
26 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

2.3 Kinds of Judgements and the Human

Cognitive-Operational Spheres

In defining some aspects of the civic engagement of evaluation, it may be useful to

decline evaluative judgement at the different levels on which its utterances stand.
The judgement is true whether all the utterances constituting it are true. The degree
and type of truth of the judgement are the subject of philosophical reflection to which
we refer [3, 8, 11]; here we indicate four articulations in relation to the cognitive and
operative spheres proposed by Rizzo [19] listed below:
• Tecno-science: includes the knowledge and know-how that support technolog-
ical progress based on the individuality of the consultant capable of carrying out
highly specialised tasks; the judgement of fact regarding functions and perfor-
mance measures prevails, i.e. the efficiency of the technological organism and the
effectiveness of the response to requirements;
• Economy: includes the functions of the rationality of individual behaviour that
are coordinated in the formation of the personality of the manager capable of
representing through monetary measurements, the spectrum of needs and the
space of preferences between different goods and between stocks and streams of
value, through cost-effectiveness criteria;
• Policy: includes arguments about the appropriateness of the underlying (above-
mentioned) elaborations, and through which the agency of the decision-maker
unfolds in selecting the actions that merit to be implemented in response to
demands for equity;
• Etics: encompasses the functions of consciousness that legitimise and delimit
the leadership of a mentor who is qualified to act on the basis of the moral value
judgements he or she makes on individual behaviours because of their compliance
with a vision of solidarity in space and time.
In these spheres of existence and thus in the different cognitive functions they
enable, in the subject’s awareness and capacity in relation to his or her social rank,
in the type of judgement and its references that delineate a specific field of action,
and finally in the value contents that fill the judgement with sense, the civil function
of evaluation and its place among the social sciences with a normative imprint are
established.
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 27

3 Value

3.1 Value as a Condition and Content. From Object to Action

In Appraisal the value judgement has been taken as a sentence whose content is
the monetary measurement of the value of an asset; since the latter consists of a
statistically sound prediction, it has been confused with the “estimate judgement”,
or rather with “estimate” itself; as a result, since estimate is not a content of the
judgement, but itself a form judgement whose content is a prediction concerning a
more or less probable fact, according to the correspondence theory of truth, estimate
should be considered as a factual judgement.
Such an estimate is based on comparison, i.e. the correspondence between a
scale of values, the specific and concrete characters (descriptors or regressors), and
a scale of prices, general and abstract monetary measures. Moreover, the refer-
ence context of this estimate, i.e. the system of accepted conventions, is the market
whose evidence has traditionally supported descriptions and interpretations of the
relationship between values and prices.
In the view of a science of valuations inspired, on the other hand, by an economy
of values—not of prices—value is relevant as a “condition” and as the “content” of
judgement.
As a “condition”, value can be associated with the set of “attributes”—convergent
or divergent, independent and/or interdependent—of an object entitled to economic
exchange because of its preferability; in this way, as the use-value (which is mani-
fested in the attributes acknowledged to the object) is transmuted into exchange value
(which expresses the point of view and purposes of a collective subject), the object
ascends to the status of “good”: in this capacity, the object is the medium of the
message of economic communication, i.e. of the value of the good. The latter is not
a simple monetary measurement (the price) but a value in the proper sense as it is
accepted by the socio-economic subject as the code through which the economic
system selects potential purchasers.
Since this value—reduced to a price through the filter of monetary language—is
accepted in social communication, it has acquired its own social objectivity and can
become the content of judgement and in the forms required by the purpose of valua-
tion: the purpose of the estimate “shapes the judgement” that becomes the “medium”
of the “decision”, thus the justification of acting; as a link between the present and the
future, “action” is the outcome of the most general, abstract and social form of
economic communication: “expectation”; the latter goes beyond the exchange as the
sole “end” of the valuation judgement; “expectations” also motivate unproductive
use, productive investment, postponement of the transaction in view of capital gain,
renunciation of the transaction (hoarding); these give further perspectives to both
evaluation and action (Fig. 1).
28 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

Fig. 1 Ascension from

object to action. Value as
content (grey path) and
condition (red path)

3.2 Value and Wealth, Values and Prices

Value as a condition and content of judgement involves a wide range of issues

concerning the relationship between the fundamental economic categories—cost,
price and value—and the goods/processes involved in wealth creation. One of the
most relevant issues in the civil engagement of valuation concerns the contribution
it can make to a more equitable distribution model.
In this capacity, the science of evaluation takes on a normative function that
appears in three aspects:
• the contents of the value judgement in the light of the dialectic between evidence
and expectations—hence between the “ordinary” and the “extra-ordinary”—
which concerns the broad spectrum of motivations and circumstances that
characterise the demand in a climate of structural information asymmetry;
• the choice of “value bearers”, i.e. the characteristics relevant to the description of
the assets and processes involved in the growing territorial and temporal asymme-
tries, which research and consultancy respectively have the power to investigate
and the duty to address;
• the role of the discipline in the training of professionals involved in decision-
making processes, in terms of unity of competence, knowledge and awareness of
social capital perspectives and financial capital constraints.
In the three cases, the link between economics and valuation is evident in the two
dialectics, respectively between value and wealth and between values and prices.
The former originates in the socio-economic and cultural order, while the latter
is measured by the governance’s ability to adjust prices to values.
This dual dialectic is represented in Fig. 2 by the small area over which the space
of values and the space of wealth overlap; this area is the ‘space of care’ that includes
both goods that are exchanged in orderly markets and welfare support in the most
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 29

Fig. 2 Value, wealth and the

care

efficient, effective and equitable forms in which public expenditure is delivered. The
orderliness of markets is measured by the significance with which prices express the
value of goods, hence by the small distance between supply and demand prices. This
is the space within which goods and processes of wealth creation and distribution
are coordinated in the light of the civil progress and the promotion of the person [9].
Outside this dense area, a broad spectrum of values without wealth and wealth
without value lies:
• “values without wealth” refers to the opportunities and expectations of the home-
city-landscape system that are not reflected in personal and collective wealth; they
are therefore “goods without a market” and forms of social capital not supported
by the government;
• “wealth without value” refers to goods and services required by individuals for
dissipative consumption, private inactive stocks, public investments made just to
reduce levels of underemployment; the latter two types of investment do not care
about the value created and destroyed.
The axiological disorder that affects the sphere of individual preferences, and
the ethical disorder that affects the sphere of common values, are measured, for our
purposes, by the gap between wealth and value, which the science of value judgement
has the scientific and operational responsibility to reduce by widening the “space of
care” by means of truthful evaluations referring to authentic values.
This disorder stems primarily from the difficulty of matching individual and social
values and within this dialectic reconciling salience and urgenciy. Other aspects of
this dichotomy concern the reference of the notion of value, which can be considered
ad an object or an attribute (or criterion), and whether values are absolute or relative.
We will return to this last point later, while as to the distance between the sphere of
value and wealth we conclude that this distance:
1. in the field of the individual values, derives from the polysemy of economic signs
characterised by multiple value-bearers; in fact, what we call “goods” can at the
same time have value and disvalue if we consider different characteristics of
them, as with food that is very tasty but harmful, a car that is fast but polluting;
2. in the realm of the shared values, this distance is associated with the evolution
of narratives, in particular the way in which communities represent threats and
hopes in social communication through the progressive resemantisation of occur-
rences that are considered resistant: slavery is now definitively outlawed; a wind
farm, until a few years ago considered a landscape detractor, is now a symbol of
30 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

energy independence and low-carbon perspective; in waste we nowadays glimpse

important resources; perhaps one day we will regret eating animals.
The prospect of a direct reference by valuation to the civil economy suggests
interpreting economic goods as the result of the collective process of progressive
selection, recombination and hierarchisation of the “value bearers” by means of
which they can be represented in the economic communication; these provide the
perspectives from which we measure the worthiness of the economic goods in view
of the unity, meaningfulness and convergence of the economic processes.

3.3 Estimate and Normativity

This form of pluralism of values, and thus of the contents of the evaluation functions,
could be pointed to as an aspect of the epistemic weakness of evaluation, which would
not be a science but a mere technique.
Consequently, the value judgement abandons its civic function and is reduced
to a statistical measurement of prices, supported by the neutral observation of an
impersonal and unintentional mechanism; a natural phenomenon cannot be said to
be right or wrong since it originates in (human) nature, thus exempting from any
responsibility the excesses of individual rationality that create economic inequality
and social polarisation. This type of justification therefore has no reference to justice
and since it is reduced to the accuracy of a description, it has no reference to truth in
its deepest sense.
As a judgement on a natural fact, estimation is not required to take a position on
the nature, origin and effects of phenomena that fall within the sphere of social—and
in particular—economic communication: the market.
But if so, in what sense does evaluation contribute to the civil economy? And
what about its status as a science? Can a discipline perform a civic function without
a scientific status? How does the estimative sentence have “validity for the public”?
Can it be considered as a cognitive strategy producing a “dense description” of
reality? What reality “fills the value judgement with truth”?
The answers to these questions can only be partial here and entrusted to a few
considerations of a practical nature and concerning the object of investigation of
our discipline; 1. social capital in the 2. operational context of the home-city-
landscape system, and 3. its ultimate purpose, the protection of the dignity of living
in community.
However partial these three aspects of the civil commitment of valuation science
may be, they offer a significant cue to illustrate the normative sense of value judge-
ment, which traditional Appraisal has not privileged. It is also likely that this weak-
ness is due to the fact that the market, as the primary source of economic information,
does not support either the right or the least wrong economic behaviour.
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 31

In fact, the functioning of the market has always supported the contraction of
the “space of care” whereby many areas of the territory have been identified as a
reservoir of positive externalities benefiting industrialised areas on a national scale,
and urban and metropolitan areas on a regional scale. The tragedy of population
transfer to more developed areas has been justified as the outcome of the “natural”
transition to the industrial development model, and the abandonment of entire urban
contexts and immense real estate assets that have disappeared from the market has
been considered the necessary cost. In these cases, the market has supported real acts
of strength by the production economy in the short run against the weakness of the
conservation economies established in the long run.
The market has thus acted as a blind mechanism with regard to “non-market
values” that have been cynically removed from economic communication without
their care being transferred to public expenditure, thus in total absence of any
compensation.
It should also be noted that this possible compensation would have slowed the
transfer of workforce and demand for housing, goods and services to the developed
areas, thus halting their further expansion; therefore, the irreparable impoverishment
of the inland areas was considered necessary upstream.
Such issues have a foundational axiological dimension that ties together the
ethical, political, economic and techno-scientific narratives, which inevitably and
more or less consciously presuppose stances and value judgements.
In conclusion:
• if the competitive market is not the appropriate reference for assessments that
support balanced models of territorial development;
• if this balance is assumed as an essential point of the civil commitment of
evaluation science;
• if the scientific value of Estimation is given in the assumption of the civil value
system as that reality that fills the evaluative statement with truth;
• then it cannot be stated that the market and the Appraisal, which merely ascer-
tain the success of some territories at the cost of the destruction of others,
provide a “dense description of the reality of values” over the extended and
all-encompassing home-city-landscape system.
The justification of economic policies aimed at intentionally determining deep
social and territorial asymmetries points to some general issues of the dichotomy
between the absoluteness and relativism of the concept of value.

3.4 Independence and Transcendence of Value

According to the metaphysical and absolutist conception, the link between value—as
the “duty to be of a norm”—and the practical sphere is realised in the function of
judgement that gives dignity “to things that can be judged” (according to Windelband)
32 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

in each of the domains of human experience in which values state “as transcendent
realities” (according to Rickert) [1].
This conception applies to the issue of territorial and environmental justice: the
principle of solidarity implies equal opportunities for all by first neutralising rent and
its many distorting effects. In short, the civil commitment implied by the valuation
science considers distributive justice as a guarantee of the right to the “transcenden-
tals”—the true, the just, the good, the beautiful—i.e. to authentic and unamendable
values [7].
From the standpoint of phenomenology, “according to Scheler, value, as an inten-
tional object of feeling” [1] and a vehicle of identification (emotional fusion) implies
a form of distributive justice that is identified with the balance between noble and
servile labour: a greater imbalance between them has always allowed for higher rates
of investment whose surplus has been consolidated over time in the lasting traces of
civilisation, which are recognisable in the forms of social capital.
In the liberalist narrative, the asymmetry of the social order is justified by indi-
vidual merit and aptitude to take responsibility; moreover, asymmetry is considered a
public virtue in as much as the economic order guaranties and defends the possibility
of moving up the social pyramid, thus supporting hope. Nonetheless, the progres-
sive and widespread accumulation of new asymmetries produces dominant positions
that escape the levelling of distributive variables and allow pockets of privilege and
poverty traps to form. In the depths of time and the vastness of space, empires have
preceded, crossed and overcome this narrative.

3.5 The Human’s Values

The power of human in “reversing traditional values” (Nietzsche) [1] founds a

dynamic and adaptive conception of values that is important in overcoming the homo
oeconomicus stereotype; according to Donald MacKenzie: “individuals capable of
such radical, assiduous and consistent selfishness that they do not ‘owe anything to
anyone’ and regard all others as strangers and any form of life as a resource” [15]. This
selfishness goes so far as to fail to question the primacy of progress—the greatest and
most resistant of economic narratives—at the expense of its underlying, ecosystem
harmony, despite the dramatic evidence on the effects of a colonialist and para-
sitic behaviour: the global dimension of the ecosystem crisis falsifies the “altruistic
selfishness” myth. In accordance with the progressive acceptance of this evidence,
valorising the agent—the human—implies reaffirming the primacy of affectivity: the
condition of the poorest and the failure of the most are evidence that call for reference
to unamendable values selected in view of civil progress.
Aspects of axiological relativism can be found in reductive locutions of the notion
of value—according to Meinong, Ehrenfels and Perry, the “motivating force”, the
“desirability”, the possible “interest” [1]—to which valuation practice refers when
addressing issues of monetisation of intangibles with methodologies valid in the
realms of contingent and probable. Evaluation support for civil economy should not
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 33

target contingent saliences that may not be considered authentic, i.e. that may be
excluded from the “space of care”.
Not even historicist relativism invalidates the prospect of a successful combination
of metaphysics and empiricism of values. Even if we accept that, according to Dilthy,
“history produces the ideals and ends by which people and events are judged” (ib.), we
should judge their authenticity by relativising (contextualising) rather the conditions
in which they are produced, so as to judge whether these ideals and ends count
as goals of civil progress or conceal the purpose of dominating others. Even with
regard to the sudden changes in our priorities in relation to the current environmental
irritations, it is not correct to argue that “norms and values arise and die in history
and do not exist outside or above the course of it” (ib.), but rather that each political,
social, cultural climate reinterprets the ultimate values by moving closer to or further
away from the authentic ones according to the contingent need for social cohesion
or consensus.
The acknowledgement by history of the social and civil benefits of bloody revolu-
tions does not imply that “the end justifies the means”: violence will always be an evil
regardless of its contingent necessity; those who choose violence nevertheless bear a
moral responsibility for it. The “lesser of two evils” is merely a form of resignation, a
surrender without having fought. The broad acceptance of such beliefs certainly does
not call into question the need to pursue authentic values. Moreover, if the relevance
of a value depends on whether it is a means or an end, then, for example, violence as
an extreme means is certainly not a value but a disvalue that is difficult to associate
with what is good, despite what Dewey states about the unity of means and ends:
“Criticism of values is the discipline of human choices, which implies the relation
between means and ends, so that one cannot judge on ends without at the same time
judging on the means to achieve them” (ib.).
Choices made under extreme conditions still reflect absolute values, albeit indi-
rectly, through the intermediate goals and the means identified to pursue them. The
fact that war—backed by aggression, blind obedience, dissolution of personality—is
always invoked as a means to resolve a conflict does not call into question peace as
an absolute value, it only implies that the “human [is] all-too-human” [17]:
6. Thou shouldst become master over thyself and master also of thine own virtues. Formerly
they were thy masters; but they are only entitled to be thy tools amongst other tools […]
Thou shouldst learn how to take the proper perspective of every valuation ––– ... also the
amount of stupidity which opposite values involve. Thou shouldst learn how much necessary
injustice there is in every for and against, injustice as inseparable from life, and life itself
as conditioned by the perspective and its injustice […] Thou shouldst –––’ But enough; the
free spirit knows henceforth which “thou shalt” he has obeyed, and also what he can now
do, what he only now–––may do. [17–Preface, pp. 9–10].
34 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

4 Syntheses. Value as the Realm of Social Reality

On this basis, although considered the harshest critic of absolute values, Nietzsche
seems to be the one who rehabilitated them as ever new against the persistence of
false ones based on prejudice.
The same rejection of axiological dogmatism that conceals “what [one] can now
do, what he only now–––may do”, should be applied to economic values. According
to Simmel and Weber, "although they can be considered the epiphenomenon of
relativity as they are predominantly conflicting" [1], a preliminary distinction must
be made between the two dimensions of concrete and abstract values, respectively
preferences and prices (or decisions in the public economy). The concrete or personal
dimension refers to the authentic value of happiness, the abstract or social dimension
concerns the rules for achieving the best allocation of happiness itself.
In its evolution, according to Troeltsch, historicism accepts the absoluteness of
values, considering that history is always in relation to absolute values and, according
to Meinecke, it finds its foundation in those it realises which retain unconditional
validity [1]. The attribute of relativity thus seems more appropriate in character-
ising the multiple layers and articulations through which absolute values appear and
operate in the contingencies of human story.
Such “practical relativism” is justified because of the branching, semantic ambi-
guities, epistemic gaps, informational incompleteness, and probabilistic weakness
that affect the causal chains with which we usually harness the reality of facts in the
network of apical, essential, authentic values.
In this reality, physical and relational components are indistinct: social commu-
nication metabolises the laws of nature and the norms of coexistence, giving rise to
the reality of values. Value is the space in which social reality takes the form of civil
coexistence.
The idea of a social reality as a reality of values as delimited by “thinking by
values” was criticised by Heidegger: “value is the opposite of being in that it repre-
sents the specificity of human viewpoints, their conflict, and the overpowering of
some by others” [1]. For its part, the science of valuations promotes the dialectic
between multiple values as fertile ground for a synthesis made possible by measuring
the “value of values” [21] with a view to overcoming these conflicts in the synthesis
of what we mean by civilisation.
Contemporary ethics assumes values as the object of knowledge which moral and
political choices base on. Against relativistic interpretations of this idea, “Apel and
Habermas recognised objectivity and universality in values that unfold the social
dialectic. The ontological foundation of ethical values is consequently supported by
a finalistic structure of reality (neo-Aristotelian), which by identifying value with
purpose (Jonas) rehabilitates the principle of accountability” [1].
Elements of nature-based absolutism of values are to be found in the neo-
Marxian tradition that identifies energy as the “value substance”, today referred
to as “embodied energy”. “The principle of conservation of energy underlies the
principle of general legality and unique causality” [20]”. Recognising it only in the
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 35

midst of an unprecedented planetary energy crisis does not imply the relativism of
this natural value, but rather that the sense of accountability has not so far been equal
to the actual value of ecosystem harmony.
The principle of responsibility is implied by the relationship between needs and
wishes, the former more urgent and therefore to be assumed as means, the latter more
salient and therefore to be assumed as ends.
Consequently, the “evaluation of values”—i.e. their comparison in terms of rele-
vance, pertinence, appropriateness, topicality, degree of adherence, cogency, prospect
etc.—addresses, on the one hand, the “practical reason” they imply and, on the other,
the “identity” they assume with respect to the social reality they represent. It is worth
noting here that:
– some of the highest wishes are rooted in basic needs, just as love and solidarity
are in the needs of the continuity of the species 4,
– the extreme way for personalities to emerge is to reject a life where “if nothing
matters, there’s nothing to save” 22.
A further declination of the possible reconciliation of absolute and relative values
is the recognition of the “plurality of values” and consequently of the “multiplicity
of possible life projects” with respect to which the authentic values (not in question)
qualify human action as capable of reducing conflicts and expanding mutualism,
complementarity and reciprocity.

5 Conclusions. Valuation: In Reason and Truth

5.1 Truth as the Sense of Value Experience

The depth and breadth of judgement and value categories require the science of
evaluation to defend, cultivate and fertilise this boundless territory, this domain of
heuristic opportunities where the common space of knowledge and action is defined
“in reason and truth”.
The patient exercise of value judgement does not allow subordinate forms of
evaluation to be assumed as conclusive and exclusive of the evaluative assertion. In
particular:
• having overcome the limits of “measurement”, “attribution”, “allocation”, the
judgement functions outline the space of “interpretation”, “knowledge”, “aware-
ness”;
• the value contents of the evaluative statements such as “costs”, “prices”, “prefer-
ences” are to be recognised for their descriptive and comparative capacity, thus for
representing the coherence of the interweaving of facts and values of economic
reality; the widespread metabolisation of the capitalist narrative and the preva-
lence of monetary language over the simple utility and production functions, have
revealed the “beyondness” [14] of saliences and urgencies by projecting them into
36 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

the “augmented reality” of “opportunities” and “expectations” respectively: in this

double extension of value judgement towards past and future, the former warns
against regret, the latter fosters hope for a better world.
The science of valuations performs a meta-project function in assuming value
as the generative matrix of multiple forms of the human space, all consistent with
the statute of the values, which are most salient and urgent in view of emerging life
projects; as such, they expound “reasons” that the “truth” of the value judgement
makes true:
• in a vertical direction, that is in relation to their coherence with inemendable
values;
• in a horizontal direction, that is in the sphere of social reality with regard to
“content, position in the means-end chain, term of reference, scope of application,
degree of social adherence” [13].
In this sense, the reality under investigation can only be a reality of values; a reality
of costs and prices would not arouse the same interest for the public: we would not
capture its sense and essence.
Investigating the link between values and reality means “telling the truth about the
reality of values” and truth is an implicit quality of judgement. An evaluative assertion
is true on the condition and to the extent that it “says how things are”; the philosophy
of language provides the necessary anchors to avoid misunderstandings between
the categories of truth and value, thus extending the scientific value of our discipline
from mere codes of conduct and tools, to its implicit and deeper fundamentals.
Appraisers bear a considerable burden of responsibility in dealing with the broad
spectrum of valuations, due both to the incompleteness of information, which
concerns the factual component of the value judgement, and to the fluidity of the
appraisal semantics, which concerns the axiological one [11].
A semantics is a cross-categorical relationship connecting concrete value
attributes (utility, justice, beauty) and abstract quantitative (cardinal or ordinal)
measurements (price, costs, choices); the latter make value qualities comparable
and substitutable over the broad spectrum of justification [2] and, accordingly, of
accountability.
Furthermore, for our purposes, the question of value is more than ever hinged in
the duality between monetary and real economy and between monetary and non-
monetary values so much so that they are both part, and in indistinguishable forms,
of our affective sphere. The dialectic between the concentration of financial wealth,
and the monetary policy measures by which economic institutions try to counteract
it, displays the extent to which money is “a form of wealth with an autonomous
(demanded for its own sake) and autogenous (capable of self-generation) value” [19].
As such, money performs the typical functions of language, because just as language
selects the most meaningful signifiers and evolves in the “langue/parole” dynamic
[10], similarly money selects the most liquid goods and influences the conditions of
their aptitude to create added value.
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 37

The monetary value of economic goods, like the significance of utterances, pene-
trates the deepest sense of their worthiness: in fact, mere utility is a particular and
contingent value, whereas monetary value, insofar as it is formed and evolves within
the framework of economic communication, is a general and structural value.
Now, in the theoretical context in which the link between monetary and non-
monetary values is analysed, it emerges that factual truths (utility and productivity)
are a premise of axiological truths (prices and costs), that the reality of values
subsumes the reality of facts, and that truth lies in values and not in facts.
The value of goods is associated with the sense they make in economic commu-
nication, rather than with their utility: within a development model dominated by
financial redundancy, the logic of the utility of consumer goods and the productivity
of capital goods gives way to the further sense they make as an effect of the rhetoric
of monetary language, for better or for worse.
The “statute of sense” is based on truth not as a mere logical value, but as a “value
in the spirit of logic” 6. As a science, the new Appraisal is going to assume the
features of a super-evaluation, an elaboration that seeks in the truth of evaluations
not only a logical coherence, but an axiological authenticity.
The requirement of sense can also be associated with the one of rationality. “The
core of any question of rationality has a prescriptive and non-descriptive characteri-
zation […] Every judgement presupposes some parameter of evaluation. The world
[…] provides a normative basis for our rational activity and […] therefore a concep-
tion of rationality concerns normative judgments about verbal and non-verbal acts
[…] These normative criteria are represented by truth” 11.
The broad spectrum of market failures, which has led to significant social and
environmental justice issues, gives valuation science the opportunity to reform the
one-dimensional economic rationality and to walk the path of the further sense that
natural structures, technological infrastructures and cultural superstructures can and
must make in the face of today’s dark prospects.

5.2 Value Judgement as “Capitalization of Truth”

In economics, a pricing system can be considered a semantic field whose elements, the
economic signs—as interpreters in this semiosis process—are comparable combi-
nations of value and price. Even though these economic semantics appear to be
unintentional, they reflect the orders and disorders generated by the collisions of
multiple agencies, inside that market, such as businesses and consumers, as well as
outside it and at all levels, from the geo-political, to the geo-economic and the global
financial ones.
Different levels of agency can be considered, from the superordinate ones that
construct rules, constraints and possibilities, to the gradually subordinate ones that
within these limits determine “forms at a lower order level” (as in the entropic drift
of a thermodynamic system), the market equilibrium, an ideal steady state of prices
and quantities.
38 S. Giuffrida and M. R. Trovato

The context of these intentions defines the different limits and interpretative
possibilities within which our evaluations are framed.
The devices of social cohesion—market and welfare—constitute the two distinct
and complementary realms of the economic communication on which the social
order of communities is based. Within them, the prevalence of the many individual
agencies which, in times of economic-financial instability and sudden transition
between different forms of development, crowd around around scarce and irrepro-
ducible goods, create situations of semantic disorder, gaps in the experience of value
and discontinuities in the flow of wealth.
The disarray of values that has characterised, above all, this part of the decade
bears witnesses to how, especially in the absence of market references (semantic
incompleteness and opacity) and in a situation of scarce capacity of the political
administrative system to govern crises, the sharing of fundamental values assumes a
civil and, ultimately, “political” function, as D’Agostini and Ferrera 5 has highlighted
with regard to truth.
The adaptation of the economic order to the changing axiological profile of the
social community identifies evaluation as a militant prospect. The emphasis on the
normative and thus political dimension of value judgement stresses that in the pure
axiological desert value judgement cannot say how things are, but rather how they
should be. In the first case it deals with the various forms of semantic incompleteness,
in the second it prefigures a plurality of possible fates.
This double register—albeit more normative than positive—of value judgement
reflects the dual dimension of value itself as the premise of choices referable to
saliencies and urgencies and their interdependence.
The estimative approach that better reflects the dialectic between space and time
of values, between “circumstances and furtherness”, between “explicit and implicit
liquidity” [19] is the one based on the capitalisation value.
By projecting this approach from the world of property estimate to the universe
of the apex economic values, the civic commitment of valuation brings order to the
multiple “circumstances” of axiological disorder by inspiring value judgements, the
shape (truth) and content (authentic values) of which support the prospects of a better
world.
Ultimately, if truth—as a concept superordinate to judgments about the good, the
just, the beautiful etc.—is the original form of the “capital of reason”, then it can
be argued that value judgment “capitalizes the truth of values, explicit and implicit”
that is, it fills with truth those statements we use to represent the reality of values in
its dimensions of wanting to be, being able to be, needing to be.
The reflections proposed here are intended to address the importance of foun-
dations in the face of the hypercomplexity of the reality of values that the science
of evaluation faces, in the climate of the sudden modification of the natural-human
order due to the accumulation of what we only now recognise as misunderstandings,
errors, fake beliefs, prejudices, and fallacious scientific approaches.
Starting from now, hopefully, our scientific community will be able to embrace in
its paradigm the unity of value knowledge and the unifinality of evaluation practices.
Why Foundations …? Evaluation as Civil Commitment 39

The civil commitment of the science of value judgement pursues the prospect of
an enlargement of the affective realm: in space, as to the extent of the present values;
in time, as to the deep rootedness of them.

References

1. Abbagnano N (2008) Giudizio. In: Abbagnano N (ed) Dizionario di Filosofia. UTET, Torino
2. Caputo S (2015) Verità. Laterza, Roma-Bari
3. Caputo S (2024) The tip and the bottom (infra)
4. Churchland P (2012) Braintrust: what neuroscience tells us about morality. PsychOpen.
Princeton, NJ, USA
5. D’Agostini F, Ferrera M (2019) La verità al potere. Sei diritti aletici. Einaudi, Torino
6. D’Agostini F (2013) Realismo? Una questione controversa. Bollati Boringhieri, Torno
7. D’Agostini F (2011) Introduzione alla verità. Bollati Boringhieri, Torino
8. D’Agostini F (2024) Valuating valuations: the case of happiness as oikeiosi, infra
9. De Monticelli R (2011) La questione civile. Raffaello Cortina, Milano
10. De Saussure F (2005) Corso di linguistica generale. Laterza, Roma-Milano
11. Dell’Utri M (2016) Razionalità e verità. In: Dell’Utri M, Rainone A (eds) I modi della
razionalità. Mimesis, Milano-Udine
12. Dell’Utri M (2024) The inextricability of fact and value (infra)
13. Gallino L (1978) Dizionario di Sociologia. UTET, Torino
14. Giuffrida S (2017) The true value. On understanding something. In: Stanghellini S et al (eds)
Appraisal: from theory to practice, Springer. pp 1–14. ISBN: 978–3–319–49675–7. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-49676-4_1
15. Latour B (2022) Dove sono? Lezioni di filosofia per un mondo che cambia. Einaudi, Torino
16. Nicosia S (2000) Sul concetto di giudizio in Grecia. Un approccio linguistico. In: Nicosia S
(ed) Il giudizio. Filosofia, teologia, diritto, estetica. Carocci, Roma
17. Nietzsche F (1910) Human all-too-human. A book for free spirits, Preface. Morrison & Gibbs
Limited, Edinburgh
19. Rizzo F (2002) Dalla rivoluzione keynesiana alla nuova economia. Dis-equilibrio, tras-
informazione e co-efficiente di capitalizzazione. FrancoAngeli, Milano
20. Rizzo F (1999) Valore e valutazioni. La scienza dell’economia o l’economia della scienza.
FrancoAngeli, Milano
21. Rizzo F (1990) Il valore dei valori. FrancoAngeli, Milano
22. Safran Foer J (2009) Eating animals. Little Brown, Boston
The Inextricability of Fact and Value

Massimo Dell’Utri

Abstract In this chapter I put forward some reasons to show how judgments of
fact and judgments of value are intertwined. These reasons run contrary to a deep-
rooted cultural tradition, which sees a sharp distinction—a dichotomy—between
the natural sciences, on the one hand, and the human sciences, on the other, and
therefore between facts and values. Accordingly, I show which tradition this is and
what the advantages of abandoning its main tenets are. Central to the exposition is
the explanation of why the science of valuations can be taken to represent one of the
best instances of the inextricability of fact and value.

Keywords Fact · Value · Natural and human sciences · Dichotomies · Science of

valuations

1 Introduction

According to a line of thinking which has for centuries informed the minds of
both experts and laypersons, judgments of value and judgments of fact belong to
two utterly different categories. The former kind of judgments appeared so deeply
infused with subjective elements that the possibility to reach something of an objec-
tive validity was excluded from the start. The latter kind, in contrast, dealing with
what was taken as the point of reference of objectivity itself—the fact—cannot but be
endowed with the highest degree of epistemological guarantee, when correct. Only
the latter can therefore aspire to truth, whereas the former is doomed to be relegated
to the realm of subjective feelings and emotions.
The aim of the present chapter is to show that this line of thinking is wrong. Far
from being irreconcilably separated, the two kinds of judgment are actually strongly
interconnected. Awareness that things are this way has far-reaching consequences for

M. Dell’Utri (B)
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 41

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_4
42 M. Dell’Utri

our culture, in general, and the science of valuations,1 in particular. Referring to the
subtitle of this volume, I will make an attempt to illustrate the extent to which natural
structures, technological infrastructures and cultural superstructures are intertwined.
The structure of the chapter is as follows. In the next section I will present a few
examples of judgments of fact and judgments of value, with the aim of bringing to
light their respective features. In Sect. 3 some dichotomies concerning these kinds
of judgment are described, and the nature of ‘cultural legacy’ of the dichotomies is
clarified. Owing to this legacy, in the course of the last centuries those dichotomies
have been taken for granted, thereby obscuring their downsides. Section 4 singles
out the chief epistemological consequence of believing in them. Section 5 explains
why the dichotomies in question are actually devoid of content, and Sect. 6 illustrates
the cultural achievement we reach as soon as they collapse. Finally, in Sect. 7 I’ll
argue for the thesis that the science of valuations represents one of the most concrete
instances of the inextricability of fact and value.

2 Some Examples

Let’s begin with some instances of both kinds of judgment. The following is a list of
judgments of fact:
• The current President of the Republic of China is Xi Jinping
• The speed of light is 300.000 km/s
• In Sicily the weather is rather hot during the summer
• On the 4th of July 1776 the independence of thirteen States of America was
declared
• Berlin is north of Paris
As this list reveals, a judgment of fact describes a state of affairs which is itself mind-
independent, i.e. not relying for its existence on any specific human being. It is true
that you need a considerable number of “minds” to bring about the state of affairs the
first judgment refers to, but, as soon as it takes place, it acquires the aforementioned
mind-independency. Thus, each item on the list reports a fact which is political,
physical, meteorological, historical and geographical, respectively. And, as a result
of the description of a mind-independent fact that actually obtains, each item on the
list is true—and unquestionably so. Granted, the scientific theory from which the
second judgment follows (actually Alfred Einstein’s relativity theory) might turn out
to be flawed or partially flawed, resulting in the revelation that light actually moves
at a different speed and, therefore, that that judgment is false. However, as long as

1 Given the constellation of topics that scholars working within the many societies in real estate
appraisal and investment decision all over the world deal with, for the sake of the present chapter I’ll
adopt the stipulation according to which the phrase ‘the science of valuations’ refers to all the cases
in which uses of terms such as ‘appraisal’, ‘valuation’, ‘evaluation’, ‘assessment’ are appropriate—
cases of appraisal of real estate, valuation of projects, plans and programs for the valorization of
the built environment, etc.
The Inextricability of Fact and Value 43

we have no reliable evidence that this is the case the second judgment is true. The
same applies to the third judgment, should the environmental condition on our planet
drastically change. I assume that all this is essentially unquestionable.
The following is a list of judgments of value:
• The current President of the Republic of China is very cautious
• The value of the ancient building has been overestimated
• Picasso is better than Magritte
• Stealing is wrong
• A single-party state is a threat to democracy
As you can see, a judgment of value reports an assessment somebody makes of
something—the latter belonging to the domain of history or real estate appraisal,
aesthetics, ethics, politics and so forth. The role of individual sensitivity and expertise
is central to this kind of judgments, so that—being sensitivity and expertise definitely
subjective qualities—the possibility to express something that can be said to be
objectively valid, and so true or false, appears at first glance undermined. Hence the
semblance of a strong difference between judgments of value and judgments of fact,
so strong that this difference has usually been taken as a bona fide dichotomy.

3 The Inherited Dichotomies

I would like to stress how the conviction that there is a dichotomy between facts
and values reflects a more general dichotomy of a cultural kind: the dichotomy
between natural and human sciences—roughly, the disciplines having the many
aspects of (non-human) nature as their objects of study, on the one hand, and the
disciplines focusing on the many aspects of the human being, on the other. From at
least the birth of modern science during the seventeenth century until very recently,
the natural sciences such as physics, biology, chemistry and so forth were deemed to
be highly successful as far as their explanatory and predictive powers are concerned,
and registering clearly and objectively quantifiable progress. On the contrary, soci-
ology, psychology, philosophy, ethics and the rest of the human sciences appeared
tainted with uncertainty of results and endless internal disagreement. This is surely
a summary and approximate account of what actually happened, but it mirrors what
laypersons have been thinking for ages—and in part still think—about the inner
power of the theoretical production in both fields. The opposition was one of cogni-
tive strength versus cognitive weakness, to the extent that the difference between
the natural sciences and the human sciences has been taken as a dichotomy with
no remedy. It is from this dichotomy that the dichotomy between facts and values
ensues.
Let’s now make a brief pause to ask which of the two realms of disciplines we
would place the science of valuations in. This is no easy task at all. Indeed, the science
of valuations represents a combination of different pieces of knowledge: if you want
to state what a house, a farm land, a fishing lake etc. is worth, you have to appeal to
44 M. Dell’Utri

an array of knowledge that ranges from physics and mathematics to economics, civil
law, case law, aesthetics, sociology and still others. In brief, spheres of knowledge
traditionally considered to belong to both the natural and the human sciences. This
might already plant doubt on the suitability of the dichotomy between natural and
human sciences, and I will touch on this point below. For the time being I would like
to draw attention to two further dichotomies that the dichotomies mentioned so far
carry in their wake.
The former is that between subjectivity and objectivity. If you look for the
etymology of the word “objective”, you will see that this word comes from medieval
Latin ‘objectivus’, which comes in its turn from ‘objectum’, i.e. object. If you then
consider the usual explanations dictionaries provide for the meaning of the word
“objective”—namely ‘not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in consid-
ering and representing facts’ and ‘not dependent on the mind for existence’—it is
most likely that you will very suddenly realize that what is described is just what
the natural sciences have been traditionally taken to study. Hence the radical differ-
ence—the dichotomy—between objectivity and subjectivity, where subjectivity was
derogatorily ascribed to the realm of the human sciences.
The latter dichotomy was already mentioned above—it is that between cognitive
weakness and cognitive strength. Take for instance physics. The great results physi-
cists have achieved from the times of Galileo Galilei onwards are unquestionable.
Nobody in her or his right mind would deny that physics has marked an actual theoret-
ical progress accompanied by important technological outcomes—the high esteem
Galileo, Newton, Einstein and colleagues are traditionally held in is but indirect
evidence of this. The same cannot be said for scholars and branches of knowledge in
the human sciences—not with the equal degree of unanimity at least. Dissent over the
plausibility of one and the same theory or thesis is virtually the rule, and this makes
it very hard to talk of progress here, or of gaining knowledge, or of ‘touching the
truth’, and the like. The cognitive weakness of the human sciences therefore seems a
piece of unmistakable wisdom, according to the layperson. Not to the experts though,
it should be noted, or to the most well-educated and those endowed with particular
insight.

4 An Epistemological Consequence

Indeed, that all this is not the case is what I am going to show in the present
chapter. Before doing so, I would like to highlight an epistemological consequence of
believing in the foregoing dichotomies: belief in them paves the way to ‘undesirable’
versions of relativism, scientism, and naturalism. In order to grasp why this is so,
notice that not all versions of these “isms” have serious drawbacks. For instance, taken
at face value the thesis of relativism is quite acceptable: as a matter of fact, knowl-
edge, truth and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and
are not absolute—as one of the first googled dictionary entries has it. The life of each
of us is unavoidably tied to the basic principles and values of the culture we happen
The Inextricability of Fact and Value 45

to be born in, but this doesn’t mean that those principles and values are constantly
and forcibly guiding us in making the choices, both big and small, our life confronts
us with, for the simple reason that we can and do criticize them as soon as we have
a good reason to do so, changing or giving them up accordingly. It is the radical
version of relativism that is deleterious and hence undesirable—and false, I would
add. It is deleterious because, if the validity of our verbal and non-verbal behaviour
is tied to our cultural context alone, so that each principle and each value expressed
within a given culture is incommensurable with the principles and values expressed
within any other culture, all dialogue with the ‘culturally other’ cannot get off the
ground at all, with the result that the unavoidable friction between different cultures
cannot but have violent resolutions. I thus regard the existing successful diplomatic
relations between countries as indirect proof of the falsity of the radical version of
relativism.2
The same goes for scientism and naturalism. If we take scientism to be the thesis
according to which the promotion of science is one of the best means by which
society can determine normative and epistemological values, I think many of us
would find it acceptable. But if one adds the clause that the promotion of science
should be the only means to this purpose, then one can’t help smelling a rat—given the
implicit unwarranted overestimation of science. Naturalism, for its part, is very close
to scientism. In its most basic form, it is the thesis according to which supernatural
forces should be excluded from any explanation of the universe, and again I contend
that the majority, if not the totality, of us would find it a thesis to be agreed upon.
However, if one adds the claim that only the laws and forces envisaged by the natural
sciences have full right to tell us how the world actually is, at the expense of the
contribution of the human sciences, then one gets a view overlapping with the worst
version of scientism. This undesirable stance should surely be given a wide berth,
given that the idea according to which the world is what the natural sciences establish,
combined with the idea according to which the sole valid method for the acquisition
of knowledge is the one used by the natural scientists, is far from clear. Not only is
this an undesirable stance, but it is also a pernicious one, since it rules out all kinds
of values from our metaphysical horizon in one fell swoop, thereby making values
something that cannot be rationally argued for.3
One last quick remark before leaving the question of the epistemological
(and metaphysical, for that matter) consequences of belief in the aforementioned
dichotomies. One may agree about the undesirability of the radical versions of rela-
tivism, scientism and naturalism, but at the same time one might wonder why they
should be so pernicious. The answer relies on the exclusion of values we have just
touched upon. If, on the one hand, values do not actually exist, because they obviously
do not conform to the empiricist scientifically-minded criteria for existence—you
never experience a value in the same way you experience an object—and if, on the
other hand, values cannot be rationally discussed, because they do not conform to

2 For a survey of the many faces the thesis of relativism can take on, cf. Baghramian and Coliva [1].
3 For an account of scientific and ‘liberalized’ versions of naturalism, cf. De Caro and Macarthur
[2, 3].
46 M. Dell’Utri

the empiricist scientifically-minded criteria for knowledge, then any decision about
issues involving values can avail itself of no rational discussion, and will be taken
on merely irrational grounds. Therefore, shifting all this to the social and political
level, the civic and moral relevance of the denial of the dichotomies will stand out in
all its clarity. In order to comprehend this one needs only think about the delicate job
a parliament of a country must tirelessly make on financial issues, where matters of
fact and matters of (social, ethical, juridical, political, economic etc.) value combine
with each other.

5 The Intertwining of Fact and Value

Now I would like to introduce a couple of arguments to the effect that the notions
of fact and value are inextricable. To this aim, I am going to turn to what one of the
most distinguished philosophers of our time, Hilary Putnam, thought about this issue.
Putnam argued in favour of the genuineness of the judgments regarding values, and
held them to be susceptible to having a truth-value. In doing so he strongly opposed
the secular tradition I was alluding to above—a tradition so deeply-rooted as to affect
the basic intuitions of all of us, give rise to the aforementioned dichotomies, and take
them for granted.
So, the first argument Putnam develops against the dichotomies leads us to reason
on what a fact is, and shows that the dichotomies presuppose a narrow conception of
fact, whose origin can be traced back to the eighteenth century Scottish philosopher
David Hume, a thinker who had a pivotal role in the shaping of the general profile
of Western culture.
For Hume facts were the objects of sensory experience, impressions gained by
means of one or more of our five senses. Nothing is a fact unless it can be smelled,
seen, heard, tasted, or touched. But “if this is the notion of a fact, then it is hardly
surprising that [value] judgments turn out not to be ‘factual’!” [4, 22]: nobody has
ever had a sensory experience of ethical, aesthetical, juridical facts. It then becomes
clear how this notion of fact (typical of classical empiricism and which survived
until the twentieth century thanks to the backing of Neopositivism) is too narrow,
and with it that notion of objectivity that, as seen above, was modelled on the notion
of empirical object. Much of what we would naturally consider a fact escapes the
confines of the empiricists’ notion. It is the development of scientific research itself
that (paradoxically!) has made this more and more plain. Facts regarding entities that
a strict empirical perspective would consider unobservable and hence non-existent
have been considered absolutely legitimate and a part of what any scientist worthy of
the name would unquestionably take as an object of analysis. Given that talk about
facts regarding bacteria, atoms, subatomic particles, spatiotemporal curvature and
many others besides are by now quite widespread, “the idea that a ‘fact’ is just a
sensible ‘impression’ would hardly seem to be tenable any longer” [4, 22].
The second argument against the dichotomies is centred on the idea that descrip-
tions and evaluations are inextricably entangled—an entanglement which lies
The Inextricability of Fact and Value 47

beneath our description of facts both in scientific and ordinary language. Let’s begin
with scientific language.
Putnam makes us notice that scientific research presupposes a particular kind
of values: epistemic values. To see this, it suffices to pay attention to what scien-
tists actually do. We will then realise that what scientists try to do is to build a
representation of the world endowed with features such as coherence, comprehen-
siveness, instrumental efficacy, plausibility, reasonableness, simplicity, preservation
of past doctrines and even beauty. These are, according to Putnam, epistemic values.
They reveal “what ought to be in the case of reasoning” ([4, 31], my italics) or “the
admirable in the way of scientific conduct” ([4, 135], my italics). This amounts to
claim that, normally, value judgments are pervasive in the theoretical behaviour of
scientists. An example of their indispensability is the following:
both Einstein’s General Relativity and Alfred North Whitehead’s theory of gravitation agreed
with Special Relativity, and both predicted the familiar phenomena of the deflection of light
by gravitation, the non-Newtonian character of the orbit of Mercury, the exact orbit of the
Moon, and so on. Yet Einstein’s theory was accepted and Whitehead’s theory was rejected
fifty years before anyone thought of an observation that would decide between the two,
[where] the judgment that scientists explicitly or implicitly made, that Whitehead’s theory
was too “implausible” or too “ad hoc” to be taken seriously, was clearly a value judgment
[5, 67–68].

Moreover, strange as it may appear, aesthetical values too can play a role in what
scientists think and do. This aspect was made famous by the English physicist Paul
Dirac, who thought that “a theory with mathematical beauty is more likely to be
correct than an ugly one that fits some experimental data” (quoted in Hovis and
Kragh [6, 104]).
Scientific facts and epistemic values are therefore intertwined in the practice of
scientists. However, it is our ordinary language in general that reveals a deeper inter-
twining between facts and ethical, aesthetical, juridical, political, religious values,
and it is this intertwining that prevents the dichotomy between descriptive and eval-
uative linguistic uses from arising in the first place. It shows up especially in the case
of some particular adjectives.
Among them there is the adjective “cruel”. It can be used both for evaluative
aims (e.g. when we say things such as “He acted in a very cruel way towards her”)
and descriptive aims (e.g. when an historian claims “He was a very cruel king”). In
metaethics, concepts which preside over the use of these adjectives are called thick
ethical concepts, in order to distinguish them from thin ethical concepts presiding
over the use of expressions such as “good”, “right”, “ought” and the like—which
have just an evaluative character.
The discussion on thick concepts has been very lively for decades, and several
points of view have been put forward. According to one, thick concepts are actually
factual, according to another they should be broken down and analysed into two
constituents, the descriptive and the evaluative ones, and according to yet another
perspective this breaking down is an impossible task. Putnam subscribes to the latter
and takes the inseparability of the descriptive and evaluative aspects of thick ethical
48 M. Dell’Utri

concepts as evidence of the untenability of the fact/value dichotomy, since the irrec-
oncilable contrast that is often underlined between ethical statements and empirical
descriptions is nothing more than a linguistic version of the dichotomy. For him an
adjective like cruel “simply ignores the supposed fact/value dichotomy and cheer-
fully allows itself to be used sometimes for a normative purpose and sometimes as a
descriptive term” [4, 35]. And a host of adjectives are in the same boat.
Compassionate, wise, brave, considerate, jealous, rude are but a few instances
of the same kind of adjectives. All of them can be used for both evaluative and
descriptive aims. Consider the following pairs of statements: “His behaviour is really
inconsiderate” and “He is usually inconsiderate with his father”, “He is too jealous”
and “He is a very jealous guy”, “I like brave girls like her” and “She proved to be
really brave”. These are perfectly good instances of statements we might make in the
course of our daily lives, and they show how those adjectives can be used in order to
issue an evaluation or to give a description—as their former and latter horns show,
respectively. It all depends on context of utterance and prosody. Yet, it is not possible
to clearly discern the descriptive component from the evaluative one, and vice versa.
So, as we can see from our own experience,
the judgment that someone is inconsiderate may indeed be used to blame; but it
may be used simply to describe, and it may also be used to explain or to predict.
[…] And similarly, ‘jealous’ may be a term of blame and may be used without any
intention of blaming at all. (Sometimes one has a perfect right to be jealous.) [7,
138–39].
But—notice—given that the only way to gain an image of the world is to pass
through the representations we develop of it in the course of our constant rational
activity, and given that “it is not that we have some way of telling that we have arrived
at the truth apart from our epistemic values” [4, 32], we have that “the ‘real world’
depends upon our values”, for without them “we have no world and no ‘facts’” [7,
135–36].
And all this applies to the world broadly conceived, not only the physical world.
From the recognition that “every fact is value loaded and every one of our values
loads some fact” [7, 201], it follows that without values we would fail to have not
only a physical world, but a human world as well:
The world we inhabit, particularly when we describe human beings for purposes
other than the purposes of physics or molecular biology or some other exact science—
certainly the world we inhabit when we describe the world for the purposes the
economist is interested in—is not describable in ‘value-neutral’ terms. Not without
throwing away the most significant facts along with the ‘value judgments’ [8, 396].

6 A Cultural Achievement

If the foregoing analysis is correct, as I think it is, then the belief that there is a clear-
cut distinction between facts and values disintegrates. To be precise, it’s obvious
that there is a distinction between a fact and a value (and the relative judgments),
The Inextricability of Fact and Value 49

but arguing that this distinction amounts to a dichotomy is an unwarranted leap of

an ideological kind. What I have been saying so far shows that the belief in the
dichotomy shouldn’t have arisen in the first place, and the realization that this is the
case is a cultural achievement whose importance is hard to overstate. Why?
Just think of the consequences of the crumbling of the dichotomy between fact and
value and all the others that come with it. The general result is that what applies to one
of the two horns of the many distinctions, applies to the other as well. In particular, if
there are no problems in talking of objectivity, truth and rational justification in the
natural sciences, then likewise there are no problems in doing so within the human
sciences, with the outcome of a 360° openness of the rational discussion. Theses and
theories within the human sciences can be objectively evaluated on the basis of their
truth, validity, conformity to empirical data etc. as has always been the case with
theses and theories within the natural sciences. Although we do create the values we
subject our verbal and non-verbal behaviour to, we do so in response to the pressure
reality exerts upon us and the needs that follow from it. And since there are better
and worse ways to respond to reality, we can discuss the values we have created in
an attempt to see which of them best meets the demands of reality.
The human sciences can therefore no longer be viewed as in need of reduction
to the natural sciences—as the radical versions of naturalism and scientism would
have it—but must be considered to be capable of expressing a genuine knowledge
in themselves. Genuine knowledge of actual aspects of reality. The collapse of the
dichotomies can then help to grasp how the notion of objectivity is not necessarily
tied to the notions of description or object, as the case of mathematics and logic
shows, but it gains its content from the virtually endless discussion a given statement
is put to. Objectivity, therefore, is a constant achievement, which should be constantly
thought back—as soon as a sensible reason for doing so arises.
Since this concerns both the human and the natural sciences, the full acknowl-
edgment of the emptiness of the dichotomies we have been mentioning constitutes
a sort of gravestone to positivisms of every kinds, including the undesirable conse-
quences we encountered above—the noxious versions of relativism, scientism and
naturalism. If we are allowed to talk of cultural progress at all, this is surely a case
in point.

7 A Living Proof of the Inextricability

As a form of conclusion I would like to briefly come back to the question I raised in
Sect. 3, namely which of the two realms of disciplines we would place the science
of valuations in: the natural or the human sciences? In order to answer this question,
I am going to argue that the science of valuations represents one of the best and
clearest instances of the inextricability of fact judgments and value judgments.
50 M. Dell’Utri

In order to see this, let’s see what the nature of a judgment within this discipline
amounts to.4 By way of informal definition, we can say that the judgments that the
valuation scientist typically makes are a quantification of the value quality of an asset
or a project, in order to support a decisional process. It is important to appreciate
that the value quality at issue is multifaceted, since it may concern several aspects
of the given asset or project. Indeed, the latter can be evaluated by taking account of
their environmental, landscape, architectural, artistic, civic, town-planning, moral,
political, economic etc. values, and one hardly needs to notice how difficult it can be
to discern which values one must give more stress to in a given situation. These are
tough decisions, which cannot avail themselves of something like an ‘algorithm’ but
have to appeal to our best sensitivity and intuitive capacity—precisely the sensitivity
and expertise that play a central role in judgments of value, as I highlighted in Sect. 2.5
At the same time the value quality in question has to be ‘quantified’, as stated
in the informal definition above, and to this purpose a wealth of facts regarding
market prices, property incomes, business relationships of sale, mathematical rela-
tions, historical and geographical data etc. come to the fore. Moreover, the decisional
process that an economical-estimative judgment supports impinges on the recipients’
welfare, directly or indirectly. Therefore, this judgment looks like a fact judgment,
but it does possess an inescapable normative force—it tells us how things should go
so that a better situation may be realized [10].
From all this it is clear that the judgments that the valuation scientist makes weaves
together values and facts, and unavoidably so. It is in the nature of the discipline that
natural structures, technological infrastructures and cultural superstructures appear
as intertwined—as they actually are. Now, on what shelf of a library would you put a
textbook on the science of valuations? Alongside the books on the natural sciences or
those about the human sciences? We have come to acknowledge that these two realms
do not constitute a dichotomy, but they are distinct realms nevertheless. So, what can
we give as an answer? It is very difficult to say. Possibly we would place it within
the natural sciences, if you are willing to give more emphasis to the quantification
side of the story. But, then again, the object of this science in not always ‘natural’,
and this would tip the balance towards the human sciences. However, it is precisely
this doubt about the proper place of the science of valuations that shows it to be one
of the best examples of the interweaving of fact and value.6

References

1. Baghramian M, Coliva A (2020) Relativism. Routledge, New York

4 I would like to thank Salvatore Giuffrida for his help in clarifying this nature.
5 Notice that the role of intuition in the drafting process of a project is stressed by a number of
authors (cf. Fattinnanzi [9], xxiii-xxiv).
6 I am grateful to David Brett and Stefano Caputo for their useful comments on a first draft of this

chapter.
The Inextricability of Fact and Value 51

2. De Caro M, Macarthur D (eds) (2004) Naturalism in question. Harvard University Press,

Cambridge, MA
3. De Caro M, Macarthur D (eds) (2022) The Routledge Handbook of Liberal Naturalism.
Routledge, Abingdon
4. Putnam H (2002) The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays. Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, MA
5. Putnam H (2004) Ethics without ontology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
6. Hovis RC, Kragh H (1993) P.A.M. Dirac and the beauty of physics. Sci Am 268:104–109
7. Putnam H (1981) Reason, truth and history. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
8. Putnam H (2003) For ethics and economics without the dichotomies. Rev Polit Econ 15:395–
412
9. Fattinnanzi E (2017) Introduction. In: Stanghellini S, Morano P, Bottero M, Oppio A (eds)
Appraisal: from theory to practice. Springer, Cham: xv–xxvi
10. Giuffrida S (2017) The true value: on understanding something. In: Stanghellini S, Morano P,
Bottero M, Oppio A (eds) Appraisal: from theory to practice. Springer, Cham, pp 1–14
The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes
an Estimate True?

Stefano Caputo

Abstract In this chapter some basic notions and recent developments in the theories
of judgement and truth will be applied, as a case study, to real estate estimates in order
to answer the following questions: are they descriptive or evaluative judgements?
Is their truth absolute or relative to some parameters? Is their truth a matter of
correspondence with objective, mind-independent facts or is it a matter of coherence
with some mind-dependent standards (in the broad sense of “mind-dependent” which
includes cultural and social standards)? The answers to these questions will show
that real estate estimates are an interesting borderline case between descriptive and
evaluative judgements, absolute and relative truth, correspondence with an objective
reality and coherence with mind-dependent standards.

Keywords Truth · Descriptive judgements · Evaluative judgements · Real estate

estimates

1 The Varieties of Judgement

For a long time philosophers have distinguished among several kinds of judge-
ments depending on their content: a fundamental divide here is between descriptive
judgements concerning mind-independent features of the world, such as
(1) The Earth orbits the Sun
and evaluative judgements, that is to say those by which we express our positive
or negative assessment of things, actions and events using words such as “right”,
“wrong”, “good”, “bad”, “beautiful”, “ugly”; these are judgements like
(2) Causing pain just for pleasure is wrong
(3) Mona Lisa is a beautiful painting
(4) Lemon ice cream tastes good.

S. Caputo (B)
Department of Human and Social Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 53

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_5
54 S. Caputo

1.1 Descriptive Judgements

Descriptive judgements can be true or false: they are true when things are as they
say they are and false otherwise; that is to say they have, with some exceptions,
the feature called “truth-aptness”.1 Moreover their truth seems to be absolute and
eternal; this means that if a descriptive judgement is true, it is true full stop and not
true just relative to a perspective, a standard of evaluation, a theory (and maybe not
true relative to a different one); moreover if a descriptive judgement is true (false) at a
given time it remains true (false) at any other time.2 Consider again sentence (1): the
only sense in which it seems to be correct to say that (1) is true relative to Newtonian
rational mechanics but it was not true relative to, say, Aristotelian cosmology is the
following: whereas we are rationally justified, given our acceptance of Newtonian
rational mechanics and evidence available to us, in believing (1), ancient scientists
were rationally justified, given the assumptions of Aristotelian cosmology and the
evidence available to them, in believing the negation of (1). Therefore when, in
cases like this, we ascribe relative-truth to a sentence, what we are actually doing is
ascribing relativity to justified belief : a belief can be rationally justified at a specific
time and not at a later time when new evidence has been gathered and our knowledge
of the world has improved.3 So while justification may be relative to theoretical
standards and available evidence, truth is absolute. Moreover, if it is true that the Earth
orbits the Sun, this has always been true, even when Aristotelian physics was the
best available scientific theory (provided that the Earth did not have a different orbit
at those times) and will always be true (unless the Earth undertakes a long journey
outside the Solar System…). So, differently from justification, truth is eternal.
A feature of descriptive judgements that will be useful, as we will see in due
course, for distinguishing them from evaluative judgements, is what Wright [30] has
called “cognitive command”. A given discourse exerts cognitive command when, in
Wright’s words,

1 There are however exceptions to the truth-aptness of descriptive sentences: for instance it has been
claimed that sentences in which so-called “vague” predicates (e.g. “bald”, “rich”) are applied to
borderline cases, such as “Carlo is bald” (with Carlo being an individual with just a few hairs on
his head) are neither true nor false; similarly it has been claimed (since Aristotle) that sentences
concerning future contingent events, such as “By June 2021 a vaccine against Covid-19 will be
available” are neither true nor false before the time they point to has come.
2 Strictly speaking this is true only of what can be called “fully determinate judgements”, that is

to say those whose content represents a specific possible state of the world which obtains or does
not obtain; so for instance whereas “It’s raining in Turin on 10-1-2020 at 9 o’clock” is a fully
determinate judgment, “It’s raining” is not such, since in order to evaluate its truth, it must be
specified where and when rain is said to be falling. Notice that if a distinction is made between
sentences and judgements (intended as what is believed in uttering sentences) it can be claimed,
as many philosophers do, that judgements are always fully determinate, since believing something
involves the commitment to its truth, so what is believed must be truth-evaluable and, therefore,
fully determinate. However, since this distinction between sentences and judgments is note relevant
for what follows I will use the two terms interchangeably.
3 In a still weaker sense we sometimes use locutions such as “This is true for me but not for you”

to mean “I believe that this is true and you don’t”.

The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes an Estimate True? 55

It is a priori that differences of opinion formulated within (that) discourse […]

will involve something which may properly be regarded as a cognitive shortcoming
[30, p. 55].
In fact two people disagreeing on the truth of a descriptive sentence like (1)
can resort, as Wright [31] would say, to a court of appeal in order to settle their
dispute, namely to a mind-independent reality that is cognitively accessible to both
the disputants; this court of appeal will show that one of the two disputants was at
fault (he or she believed something false) and his being at fault will be traceable
back to ignorance of some relevant fact or to some mistake in reasoning, namely to
a cognitive shortcoming.
Cognitive command shows that the truth of descriptive sentences can be reason-
ably characterized in terms of correspondence to facts: true descriptive sentences
mirror portions of reality, ways the world is, and these ways are what philosophers
call facts (or obtaining states of affairs).4

1.2 Evaluative Judgements

Things get complicated when the truth-aptness of evaluative judgements is at stake.

On the one side the sentences by which we express these judgements appear to have
some distinctive features of truth-aptness, on the other side there are reasons to doubt
that they are truth-evaluable.
Let’s consider first some features of evaluative sentences which are typical of
truth-apt sentences.
First of all, we use sentences like (2), (3) and (4) to make assertions and assertion
is conceptually linked to truth by so called Tarskian biconditionals, which many
philosophers, since the seminal work of Alfred Tarski [28], consider conceptual and
necessary truths about truth itself. Tarskian biconditionals are all the non-paradoxical
sentences which are instances of the following schema

It is true that p i f f p

where “p” is a placeholder for declarative sentences of English, and “iff” abbreviates
“If and only if”. Tarskian biconditionals are conceptual truths about truth because
whoever understands the meaning of the word “true” should be disposed to assert “It
is true that p” whenever she asserts “p” and vice versa: in other words, asserting a
proposition is conceptually equivalent to asserting that it is true. So, since we assert
things such as “Causing pain just for pleasure is wrong” or “Mona Lisa is a beautiful

4 The correspondence theory of truth originates in the work of Aristotle (Metaphysics, IX, 1051b
1–5) and was explicitly formulated for the first time by Thomas Aquinas who defined truth as
“Adaequatio intellectus et rei” (Summa contra Gentiles, I, 59). The versions of the theory which
introduce facts as the entities to which true propositions correspond are due, at the beginning of the
XX century, to Moore [18], Russell [24] and Wittgenstein [29].
56 S. Caputo

painting”, we must be disposed to assert also “It is true that causing pain just for
pleasure is wrong” and “It is true that Mona Lisa is a beautiful painting”.
Secondly we not only assert things of this kind but we also argue in defence of our
moral or aesthetic views. An essential feature of sound arguments is however validity:
an argument is valid when it preserves truth from the premises to the conclusion,
that is to say it is impossible that the conclusion is false when the premises are
true. Therefore, since evaluative sentences figure as premises and conclusions of
valid arguments it seems that they must be truth-apt. Consider the following valid
argument:
(A) If causing pain just for pleasure is wrong, then stubbing a cigarette out on
someone’s skin just for pleasure is wrong.
(B) Causing pain just for pleasure is wrong.
(C) Stubbing a cigarette out on someone’s skin just for pleasure is wrong.
Since the argument is valid it cannot be the case that its premises are true and its
conclusion is false; so, although its premises can actually be false, if they would had
been true also the conclusion would also have been such. As a result, given both its
premises and conclusion could at least be true, they are truth-apt. But premise (B)
and the conclusion (C) are simple declarative sentences by which we express moral
judgements, so these sentences must be truth-apt.
A closely related argument for the truth-aptness of evaluative sentences points
to the fact that they can be embedded in compound declarative truth-functional
sentences such as
(5) If causing pain just for pleasure is wrong, then stubbing a cigarette out on
someone’s skin just for pleasure is wrong.
(5) seems to be true; but a sentence of the form “If p then q” is a truth-function of
its components, that is to say it is false whenever “p” is true and “q” is false and it is
true otherwise. Therefore both the components of (5) must be truth-apt, they can be
true or false; but the components of (5) are moral sentences, so moral sentences are
truth-apt.5
Let’s now consider some features of evaluative sentences that could lead to the
denial of their truth-aptness. The first I want to point to is what Kölbel’s [14] has
called “Faultless disagreement”; in Kölbel’s words,
A faultless disagreement is a situation where there is a thinker A, a thinker B, and a proposition
(content of judgment) p, such that: (a) A believes (judges) that p and B believes (judges) that
not-p; (b) Neither A nor B has made a mistake (is at fault) [14, pp. 53–54].

When in fact a moral dispute, for instance, is going on it seems that two people
who hold radically opposing views have no chance to resort to the court of appeal
of an objective and cognitively accessible reality, in order to settle their dispute. To

5 This is the core idea of the so called Frege-Geach argument against moral expressivism [9], the
philosophical view, to which I will shortly return, according to which moral sentences are not
truth-apt, since they serve only to express emotive reactions or prescriptions and have therefore no
descriptive content.
The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes an Estimate True? 57

put it in another way, it seems that, in disputes of this kind, there is no fact of the
matter that could eventually settle the dispute, allowing people to decide which is
the true opinion. This fact, together with metaphysical considerations concerning the
“queer” (in Mackie’s [17] words) status of the supposed corresponding facts (e.g.
moral facts),6 has driven many philosophers to uphold a non-factualist stance toward
moral discourse, a stance according to which there are no facts in the world making
moral sentences true. But a standard form of non-factualism about moral discourse
is so-called expressivism, according to which sentences belonging to it must not be
taken at their face value, i.e. as descriptive sentences aiming at stating facts, but,
on the contrary, should be considered as mere expressions of subjective feelings
and emotions (as for instance in the so-called “Boo-Hurrah!”-Theory advocated by
philosophers such as Stevenson [27] and Ayer [4], so they are not evaluable as true
or false (exactly as an interjection like “Boo for causing pain just for pleasure!”).
It is worth noticing that the flourishing of an expressivist stance toward moral, and
more generally evaluative discourse during the first half of the XX century, mainly
across the English speaking philosophy, was deeply connected with other central
philosophical issues, notably the theory of meaning and the theory of truth. Many
expressivists were in fact strongly influenced by the philosophical movement known
as Logical Empiricism and by the verificationist conceptions of meaning and truth
advocated by many of its leading exponents. The neo-empiricists’ theory of meaning
according to which “The meaning of a proposition is the method of its verification”
[25, p. 341] left in fact little room for ascribing a descriptive meaning, and therefore
the status of truth-evaluable sentences, to evaluative sentences. Moreover, the idea,
shared by many logical empiricists, that the only way to dispel the metaphysical
obscurities surrounding the concept of truth was to conceive it in terms of notions
such as empirical verification and confirmation converged on the same outcome: no
truth-aptness without verifiability!
Also, truth-conditional theories of meaning in the vein of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus [29] were not so hospitable to evaluative discourse. In fact, if
the meaning of a declarative sentence is conceived as a state of affairs represented
by the sentence and if one is suspicious towards the existence of moral or aesthetic
objective states of affairs, then sentences in evaluative discourses will be considered,
at least as far as their deep structure is concerned, non-declarative sentences or,
alternatively, massively false declarative sentences.

6 The queerness of, say, moral facts consists in that they should have as constituents moral properties,
such as the property of being right/good, which many (although not all) philosophers have considered
irreducible to natural properties.
58 S. Caputo

2 Some Conceptions of Truth

Deflationary conceptions of truth, rooted in the seminal work of Ramsey [23], which
are one of the main focuses of the contemporary philosophical debate on truth,7
changed the terms of discussion on these matters a lot.
Deflationism can be identified by two claims. The first one is that the aforemen-
tioned Tarskian biconditionals are definitional of the concept of truth; this means
that the infinite list of them says all that has to be said concerning truth—constitutes
an exhaustive theory of truth. The second one maintains that the unique role of the
truth-predicate consists in allowing us to endorse/assert infinite sets of sentences,
as it happens when we say things like “All the theorems of arithmetic are true” or
“Everything the Pope says is true”. It is important to stress that each Tarskian bicon-
ditional provides a different condition for a given sentence/proposition to be true,
so the theory of truth including all and only these sentences does not uncover any
essence which is common to all and only the things which are true. This is why the
deflationists’ slogan is that truth has no nature, it is a thin, unsubstantial property. But
if truth is such an insubstantial property which supervenes on our practice of making
and endorsing assertions, many of the old suspicions concerning the truth-aptness of
evaluative sentences seem to vanish. Many such suspicions were in fact, as we have
just seen, connected to more substantial theories of truth, such as correspondence and
verificationist theories and to truth-conditional/representational theories of meaning.
But if a deflationist stance toward truth is endorsed, it seems that all that is needed in
order for sentences of a given domain of discourse to be truth-apt is that they have the
grammatical surface-structure of declarative sentences and that speakers use them in
a practice showing the features of assertoric talk [5, 11, 12, 26].
Deflationism has however a problem with evaluative discourse which is the oppo-
site of those met by more traditional and substantial theories of truth: in fact, the more
truth is conceived as a thin-logical property, the more it will be difficult to make some
difference between truths in different realms of discourse. As a result, the deflationist
seems to be forced to admit that sentences in evaluative and descriptive domains,
once one grants them the status of declarative sentences, can all be true, in the same
weak sense of “true”, losing in this way some important differences between them,
for instance the fact that the former may give rise to cases of faultless disagreement,
whereas the latter exert cognitive command.
Although leading exponents of Deflationism were aware of this problem and tried
to overcome it [6], other philosophers claimed that, in order to account for the differ-
ences subsisting among truths in different domains of discourse, it was mandatory
to say something more about truth than what was licensed by the Tarskian bicon-
ditionals, without in the meantime embracing one of the classical conceptions of
truth (the correspondence theory or various kind of epistemic-verificationist theo-
ries) whose shortcoming were acknowledged. An outstanding example thereof was

7 Starting from the Seventies onward so called Deflationism gained the centre of the philosophical

stage thanks to the works of philosophers such as Quine [22], Grover, Kamp and Belnap [10], Field
[7, 6], Horwich [11].
The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes an Estimate True? 59

Wright’s Truth and Objectivity [30] which, starting from a critical discussion of
Deflationism, opened the door to two central focuses of the current debate on truth:
truth-pluralism (advocated for the first time by Wright himself) and truth-relativism.
According to alethic-pluralists (such as Wright [30, 32] and, in a different way,
Lynch [15])—although there is a unique concept of truth, which is characterizable
through a set of so-called platitudes about truth (that is to say common-sense truths
about truth), among which are the Tarskian biconditionals—this concept applies to
sentences in different domains of discourse in virtue of their having different prop-
erties, each of which can be identified with truth in a specific domain of discourse.8
So, for instance, although when we say that “The Earth orbits the Sun” and “Torture
is wrong” both are true, we mean by “true” the same thing (what we mean being
identified by our acceptance of the same platitudes concerning truth), the predicate
“is true” applies to the two sentences in virtue of two different properties they have:
in the first case in virtue of the sentence’s representing/corresponding to a mind-
independent fact, in the second case, maybe, in virtue of its coherence with other
moral sentences we accept (or in virtue of some other epistemic properties, such as
warrented assertability, depending on the theory of moral discourse we endorse).
Differently from truth-pluralism, truth-relativism (revived in the last two decades
by the works of Kölbel [13] and MacFarlane [16] maintains that truth is one but
claims that it must be relativized to standards of evaluation/perspectives, so that one
and the same truth-evaluable content may be true relative to one of such standards
and not true relative to a different one. There are two main reasons usually advanced
by truth-relativists in order to defend their (highly disputed) conception: the first one
is that the relativization of truth is the best way to account for the phenomenon of
faultless disagreement without giving up the idea that evaluative sentences (and others
concerning which a non-factualist stance can be taken) are truth-apt; the second one
is that the relativization of truth to some index is widely accepted in formal semantics
when sentences of certain kinds are at stake. Among them are, for instance, tensed
sentences such as “It’s raining”, which are true relative to some time and place and
not true relative to some others. And what about objective/absolute truth? It is defined
by some truth-relativists [13] in terms of relative truth in the following way: a given
proposition is objectively true iff it is true relative to all perspectives/standards (so
that, in some sense, objectivity is reduced to inter-subjectivity).9
Both truth-pluralism and truth-relativism have been subjected to many severe
criticisms and it is not in the scope of this contribution to asses them. What I will
do in what follows is just to take them as living, open options for recognizing truth-
aptness to evaluative sentences and in the meantime do not miss their differences
in respect of descriptive ones. So I will work under the hypothesis that it makes
sense to say first that evaluative sentences, such as moral or aesthetic ones, are
true in virtue of possessing a truth-property that is different from correspondence to
facts (which is the truth-property of descriptive sentences), for instance coherence
or warranted assertability and, second, that evaluative sentences are true relative

8 For an overview of Alethic Pluralism see Pedersen, Wright (2012, 2013).

9 For an overview of the debate on truth-relativism see Garcìa-Carpintero and Kölbel [8].
60 S. Caputo

to some standards of evaluation/perspectives and not true relative to others. Under

this working hypothesis I will try to answer, in the second part of this contribution,
the following questions concerning real estate estimates: do they exert cognitive
command or are they subject to faultless disagreement? Is their truth absolute or
relative to some parameter? Is it a matter of coherence with some mind-dependent
standards (in a broad sense of “mind-dependent” which includes cultural and social
standards) or is it a matter of correspondence with objective, mind-independent facts?

3 Real Estate Estimates

Consider a sentence of the form

(6) This property is worth $10
by which an estimate of a piece of real estate is expressed and suppose this sentence
is true. Let’s now ask: what makes such a sentence true? That is to say: in virtue of
what it is true (and not false)?11 Any estate agent would say that a sentence of this
kind is made true first of all by some features of the apartment (such as its surface
area, functionality, location, brightness) that make it preferable; and second by the
condition of the property market at a given time/place determined by the demand/
supply game. In a nutshell the market price of the apartment is a monetary measure-
ment, shaped in the matching of demand and supply, of the relative importance of the
aforementioned features to a potential buyer as well to the expectations of the poten-
tial seller. In order to calculate such a monetary measurement several algorithms,
based on statistical methods, have been elaborated.12 Once highlighted what sort of
facts make an estimate of a piece of real estate true, we are in the position to answer
the questions we put forward at the end of §2.

3.1 Arthur’s Version

Imagine a situation where someone, let’s call him Arthur, is considering selling his
apartment and asks an estate agent to value it; when the agent tells him that he values
the apartment at, for instance, 150.000 e, Arthur, disappointed, replies “You are
clearly wrong, my apartment is worth at least 200.000 e!” and he remains firm in
his opinion although the agent tries to show him how, taking into account all the
facts which are relevant in the determination of the market price of a property, he is
overestimating the value of his apartment.

10 “$” is a placeholder for a specific monetary value.

11 Truth-makers theory, which took its start by the seminal works of Mulligan, Simons, Smith (1984)
is an important brand of contemporary metaphysics and theory of truth.
12 For an overview see Appraisal Institute [1]. I’m grateful to Salvatore Giuffrida for having kindly

and patiently taught me some basic notions of Real Estate Estimate.

The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes an Estimate True? 61

I think that what would be correct to say in this case is that Arthur is wrong in
his appraisal whereas the agent is telling the truth. Moreover, Arthur’s false belief
concerning the value of his apartment depends on his inability to recognize the facts
that determine the price, an inability which is probably due to his being emotively
biased toward his flat: Arthur’s mistake is therefore due to some cognitive short-
coming. So we are in the presence of a kind of discourse which exerts cognitive
command. In addition, sentences in this region of discourse are absolutely true or
false: the agent’s estimate of the property is true not just relative to his standards (and
false relative to Arthur’s ones), unless we understand “true relative to s” (where “s”
refers to a person with her standards of evaluation) as “believed to be true by s”.13
The agent is right and Arthur is wrong, so the estimate of the former is true, full stop,
and that of the latter false, full stop. Finally, the truth of the agent’s estimate seems
to consist in its correctly mirroring some objective, mind independent facts: the fact
that the price of the apartment is $ and all the price-determining facts on which the
former fact supervenes.14 Therefore the truth of real estate estimates seems to consist
in their correspondence to facts.
But things are perhaps more complicated than that.

3.2 The Sentimentalists’ Society

Imagine a society where everybody believes in the existence of ancestral spirits (and
suppose, in addition, that these spirits really exist): it is a common belief among
people in this society (call them the sentimentalists) that if an apartment has been
inhabited by a happy family their ancestral spirits will continue to live there ensuring
good times to all new inhabitants of the apartment (in case it is sold). Being inhabited
by such benevolent spirits is, in this society, a feature that makes an apartment highly
preferable; features such as its surface area, functionality, location, brightness are
also appreciated by the sentimentalists but they are at a lower level in their rank of
preferences: they prefer, for instance, to live in a small, suburban apartment which
is still inhabited by benevolent ancestral spirits than in a large, central apartment
devoid of such spirits.
Consider now again the discussion between Arthur and the real estate agent we
presented in the last section and imagine if this discussion were to take place in
the sentimentalists’ society; Arthur’s and the agent’s estimates of the apartment are
exactly the same as before but, this time, Arthur knows that the apartment is inhabited
by the benevolent spirits and values this fact a lot, whereas the agent, although aware
of this fact, tends to undervalue it compared to features such as surface area, location

13 See footnote 2.
14 Here the mind-independence and objectivity of such facts must be understood not as the property
of existing independently of the existence of any mind (clearly no minds no prices) but as the
property of obtaining or not obtaining independently of the beliefs and desires of people making
judgments on the matter: no matter what Arthur desires concerning the price of his flat, this price
is what it is given the relevant price-determining facts.
62 S. Caputo

and so on, due to some idiosyncrasies related to his personal story; therefore he tends
to underestimate the correct value of the flat. In this case our verdict concerning who
is right and who is wrong would be different: Arthur is right and the agent is wrong,
since the former’s, but not the latter’s, estimate is in compliance with the evaluative
standards of their community. Moreover, the agent is affected by some cognitive
shortcoming, since he is unable to recognize some price-constituting fact. As in the
former case there is no faultless disagreement here and the estimate appears to be a
descriptive judgment which is absolutely true and true in virtue of its correspondence
to facts. Therefore nothing substantial seems have changed concerning the nature of
estimate judgments in passing from our society to the sentimentalists’ one; what has
changed is just the distribution of truth-values: what is true in one society is false
in the other and vice versa. This happens because different price-constituting facts
obtain in the two societies: in our society, for instance, the fact that being inhabited
by benevolent spirits is better than being located in the centre city does not obtain,
whereas in the sentimentalists’ society it does.

4 Conclusion: Estimates From Inside and From Outside

What has been said so far shows that although estimates are on the side of descrip-
tive, objectively and absolutely (not relatively) true judgements whose truth consists
in their correspondence to facts, some of the facts making them true are socially
construed, that is to say their existence depends on the evaluative standards which
are accepted in a given society and which are variable across societies.15
When estimates are at stake, objective, absolute, correspondence truth is therefore
the tip of an iceberg whose under water bottom consists of society-dependent facts
which obtain in virtue of an intricate net of evaluative judgments and preferences.
The society-dependence of these facts involves that true estimate judgements exert
cognitive command, are absolutely true and true in virtue of their correspondence to
some facts, only when they are evaluated from inside a given society. Imagine in fact
that Arthur, from inside the sentimentalists’ society, and the real estate agent, from
inside our society, start arguing about the monetary value of an apartment situated
in a no man’s land outside the borders of the respective communities and imagine,
in addition, that they agree on all the matters of fact concerning the apartment, in
particular they agree on the fact that it is devoid of benevolent spirits. Still they would
have opposing views concerning its monetary value since the agent, in accordance
with the evaluative standards of our society, values features such as surface area,
brightness and so on much more than the presence of benevolent spirits, whereas
Arthur, in accordance with the evaluative standards of the sentimentalists, assigns an
extremely high weight to such a presence. However in this case it would be correct
to classify the disagreement between Arthur and the agent as a faultless one, since

15 Of course not all the facts making an estimate true are socially construed and values-dependent;
for instance the surface area or the brightness of flat are not such.
The Tip and the Bottom. What Makes an Estimate True? 63

each of them estimates the apartment assuming the standards which are in place in
his community and here there seems to be no fact of the matter making one of the
two standards the right one for estimating the apartment. This means that if we try
to assess the truth of an estimate, so to speak, from outside any social world we are
forced to ascribe relative truth to it, where the parameter to which truth is relativized
is precisely a social world.
In the same way as a sentence like “It’s raining” is true just relative to a place
and a time but, once this time and place are fixed, it becomes absolutely true/false, a
sentence like “This property is worth $” can be true relative to a given social world
and false relative to another one; however, it becomes absolutely true (or false) once
a given social world is fixed.
By the same line of reasoning it can be said that, although estimates are true in
virtue of their correspondence to some objective facts when they are evaluated from
inside a given society, their truth appears to be more a matter of coherence with some
intra-social evaluative standards when they are considered from outside any social
world, so to speak, with a view from afar.16

References

1. Appraisal Institute (2020) The appraisal of real estate. Chicago: Appraisal Institute
2. Aquinas T (1975) Summa contra gentiles (trans: Anderson JF). University of Notre Dame
Press, Notre Dame (IN)
3. Aristotle (1924) In: Ross WD (ed) Aristotle’s metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press
4. Ayer AJ (1952) Language, truth and logic. Dover Publications, New York
5. Boghossian PA (1990) The status of content. Philos Rev 99(2):157–84
6. Field H (1994) Disquotational truth and factually defective discourse. Philos Rev 103(3):405–
452
7. Field H (1986) The deflationary conception of truth. In: MacDonald G, Wright C (eds) Facts,
science and morality. Oxford: Blackwell, pp 55–117
8. Garcìa-Carpintero M, Kölbel M (eds) (2008) Relative truth. Oxford University Press, Oxford
9. Geach P (1965) Assertion. Philos Rev 74:449–465
10. Grover DL, Camp JL, Belnap ND (1975) A prosentential theory of truth. Philos Stud 27:73–108
11. Horwich P (1990) Truth. Basil Blackwell, Oxford
12. Horwich P (2006) A world without Isms. In: Greenough P, Lynch MP (eds) Truth and realism.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 188–202
13. Kölbel M (2002) Truth without objectivity. Routledge, London
14. Kölbel M (2004) Faultless disagreement. Proc Aristot Soc 104(1):53–73
15. Lynch MP (2009) Truth as one and many. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press
16. MacFarlane J (2005) Making sense of relative truth. Proc Aristot Soc 105:321–339
17. Mackie JL (1977) Ethics: inventing right and wrong. London: Penguin Books
18. Moore JE (1953) Some main problems of philosophy. London: Allen and Unwin
19. Mulligan K, Simons P, Smith B (1984) Truth-makers. Philos Phenomenol Res 44(3):287–321
20. Pedersen NJ, Wright CD (eds) (2012) Truth and pluralism: current debates. Oxford University
Press, Oxford-New York

16This contribution is part of the research project “Semantic and Ontological Perspectives on the
Theory of Truth: Deflationism, Pluralism and Grounding” funded by the “Fondo di Ateneo per la
Ricerca 2019” (“University Fund for Research 2019”) of the University of Sassari.
64 S. Caputo

21. Pedersen NJ, Wright CD (2013) Pluralist theories of truth. In: Zalta EN (ed) The stanford
encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/
entries/truth-pluralist/
22. Quine WVO (1970) Philosophy of logic. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA)
23. Ramsey FP (1927) Facts and propositions. Proc Aristot Soc 7:153–170
24. Russell B (1918–19) The philosophy of logical atomism. The Monist, 28–29, pp. 495–527
25. Schlick M (1936) Meaning and verification. Philos Rev 45(4):339–369
26. Soames S (1997) The truth about deflationism. Philos Issues 8:1–44
27. Stevenson CL (1944) Ethics and language. Yale University Press, New Haven
28. Tarski A (1935) Der wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisiertensprachen. Studia Philosophica
1:261–405. English edition: Tarski A (1956) The concept of truth in formalised languages
(trans: Woodger JH). In: Tarski A (ed) Logic, semantics, metamathematics. Papers from 1923
to 1938. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp 152–278
29. Wittgenstein L (1921) Logisch-philosophischeAbhandlung. Annalen der Naturphilosophie
XIV (3/4). English edition: Wittgenstein L (1922) Tractatus Logico-Philosohicus (trans: Ogden
CK). London: Kegan Paul
30. Wright C (1992) Truth and objectivity. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA)
31. Wright C (2006) Intuitionism, realism, relativism and rhubarb. In: Greenough P, Lynch MP
(eds) Truth and realism. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 38–59
32. Wright C (2001) Minimalism, deflationism, pragmatism, pluralism. In: Lynch MP (ed) The
nature of truth. Mit Press, Cambridge (MA), pp 751–787
Evaluating Valuations: The Case
of Happiness as Oikeiosis

Franca D’Agostini

Abstract This paper is about alethic (truth-related) valuations. The focus is on one
of the most controversial cases, the ‘hedonic valuation’: can judgements such as ‘a is
happy,’ ‘I am happy,’ be said true or false? I present three puzzling cases, then I give
an account of the concept of happiness grounded on the ancient notion of oikeiosis.
I finally suggest that the role of truth in case of hedonic evaluations can teach us
something about the art or science of valuation in general.

Keywords Evaluation · Happiness · Truth · Vagueness · Gradualism

The science of happiness is a lively sector of studies. It variously involves psychol-

ogists, political scientists, cognitive and social scientists in general. An interesting
and controversial sector regards the measurement of H. Can we measure a multi-
dimensional and vague concept of this kind? Can we measure the truth of our H-
evaluations? And if we can, are we sure that what we pretend to measure is really
something we may call ‘H’ at all?1 Measure requires comparison, but, allegedly,
comparisons of subjective properties are implausible. Suppose you are judged and
judge yourself happier than me, and, for instance, my H-measure is 0.5, yours is 0.9,
on a 0 to 1 scale. How do we establish these evaluations? Maybe the two scales are
different, you are mostly thinking about success and achievements in your job, I am
thinking about the sadness of my sentimental life. If an observer forces us to revise

1 Johns and Ormerod [14] argue that measure does not capture H but only some aspects of it, as H
is a multidimensional concept (see Annas [2], p. 46 discussed by MacKerron [16]. Other authors
think that it is too subjective and that comparisons of happiness are meaningless [15]. Not only
that, for H-valuations we only have first-person reports whose alethic evaluation is problematic: do
they tell the truth? (Howard [12] for reconstruction and discussion). A recent account of the debate
is given by Haybron [10], and by Ingelstrom and van Der Dejil [13] (pp. 5719–5721). Ingelstrom
and van Der Dejil also suggest that at least some of the problems of H-measure can be solved (or
dodged) by the ‘calibration’ of H-scales, a program which, as they say, could improve the sector
[13, p. 5721].

F. D’Agostini (B)
University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 65

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_6
66 F. D’Agostini

our self-consideration (supposedly, specifying that H-valuations must be overall, and

not particularized on specific sectors) we can object that we judge one of the two
sectors as mostly important for us, in this moment or in general.
I do not enter this wide and complex debate. My concern is to capture what the
especially challenging case of H can tell us about evaluations in general. In Sect. 1 I
present some surprising cases of H-valuations. In Sect. 2 I briefly re-propose a theory
of H that I have developed elsewhere,2 and I revise and reformulate it in the light
of a definition of H as oikeiosis (being at home in the world). In the third section I
suggest what the case of H can tell us about alethic (truth-related) evaluations.

1 The H-Factor Paradox

In February 2019, in Turin, a 27-year-old man was killed by another man of the same
age. When the assassin was questioned, he said: ‘in fact, I did not know him, I simply
saw he was unbearably happy.’ In 2020, in Rome, a man killed an engaged couple, the
victims were his friends, and the murder had been carefully programmed. The killer
explained ‘I could not bear up their happiness.’ These cases possibly enlighten some
form of mental disease. But the interesting point is that they involve ‘happiness’ (if
not else, in the words of the murderers), one of the most ambiguous and controversial
concepts we can imagine, and one, whose evaluation is definitely arguable. Some
years ago, I moved from my apartment to a new house. The estate agent accompanied
a couple of potential tenants to visit the house, and in passing I said ‘I have been
happy in this house.’ As it seems, my hint was decisive. The agent told me that the
costumers were uncertain about renting the flat, for a series of reasons (fifth floor
without elevator, far from children’s school, old fixtures and windows, etc.); my
mentioning H dispelled all perplexities. Maybe it was not such a good deal. But it
was true that I had been happy there.
My focus here is the logic of hedonic evaluations. The three cases show that the
notion of H has some determinant impact over our reasoning, and via reasoning over
choices and behaviours. Let us begin by the happiness killer (HK): what is the logic
ruling his absurd inference? Which special rule led from the premise ‘these people
are happy’ to the conclusion ‘they must be killed’? Logical rules work establishing
validity, i.e. (for the modal-semantic conception of validity) the preservation of truth
from premises to conclusions, in all possible world. Now we know there are many
possible worlds full of happy people who do not deserve to be killed, the inference
is not valid for us. Clearly, the HK does not share this modal construction, he does
not inhabit the same modal structure.3 But the interesting and challenging point is
that we can see what the HK meant by ‘H.’

2 See d’Agostini [7].

3 A modal structure is a set of possible worlds related by accessibility. This structure rules truth
assignations for modal sentences of the kind ‘it is possible that p’ ‘it is impossible that p’ etc., under
the condition of the accessibility. Epistemically, the possible world paradigm works in the same
way, assuming that to ‘access’ a world w1 one needs to have a ‘vision’ of w1. The philosophical
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 67

There is something in our conception of H which authorises the semantic arbi-

trariness of HK’s consequence. And at least one shared point is that the concept of H
is overcharged of positive intentionality. Not by chance, the science of H is a crucial
concern of political and social science, and not by chance in the American Declara-
tion of Independence we read that ‘the pursuit of H’ is one of the fundamental rights
of citizens, with ‘life’ and ‘liberty’.
So we have the paradox of the H-factor: H is one of the most vague, multidi-
mensional, subjectively overloaded concepts, and yet, we are able to charge on it
an impressive amount of intentions and desires. Despite the imprecise reference of
‘H’ (predicate) to the effective (real) H (property), the HK evidently cumulated on
H a quantity of entailed or evoked meanings, values, goods, moving from a series of
valuational judgements about himself, his own life, other people’s life (see Sect. 2.1
hereafter). Here is thus how we can reconstruct HK’s argument. I am not H (for these
reasons-facts), but I must be H (for these reasons-facts), the H of other people drives
me crazy (for these reasons-facts), other people’s H compared to my lacking H is
offensive (for these reasons-facts), and hence, if I can, I should punish H-people I
encounter, or at least this particular H-person, who has all the required properties.
This was, more or less, a possible (reasonable?) reconstruction of the inferential
chain. A lot of valuational effort was required. And in each step there could be
objections about the effective truth of what was assumed. The weakest point in the
argument regards the evaluation of other people’s H: how was HK able to judge the
victim’s H (especially in the first case: the HK did not even know the man he killed)?
The question is not exclusively empirical, or psychological, because we have other
underlying questions. How was the word-concept ‘H’ able to exert such a disrup-
tive impact on HK’s mind? Why did HK believe (or made up believing?) that the
reference to H could be (in some weird way) explanatory?
In the happiness renter case (HR), the idea of another person’s H during the
possession of a good increases the value of that good itself and diminishes the impact
of other factors. We have again the questions: why were the renters so prompt in
accepting my sincerity about my own H?4 How was the concept H able to dispel all
their perplexities? As it seems, the concept had nominal power: mere mentioning ‘H’
had practical consequences. Housing market, or real estate field in general, is a sector
in which the ‘science of appraisal’ has immediately practical (economic) impact. That
some H-factor is to be included in technical evaluations may be controversial. But
the problem should not be underrated. The interesting point in HK’s as in HR’s case
is that we have a sort of empathic evaluation of other people’s H, and on the basis
of this evaluation HK and HR activate their desires: the judgement about another
person’s H in a house increases the value of the house; the evaluation of another
person’s H compared to one’s own unhappiness may activate disruptive envy.

implications are complex, there a lot of literature. For a useful synthesis see Berto and Jago [4,
pp. 12–19].
4 Notably, HR is in the same situation of the researchers who want to measure the H of individuals

and communities: she gives an evaluation of another person’s judgement about her own H (see
Sect. 2.4 hereafter).
68 F. D’Agostini

The HR’s case is more plausible than the HK’s, but still the inferential chain from
‘the previous renter was H’ to ‘I should rent this house’ may be judged arguable.
Ultimately, we may suppose at least some possible worlds in which some people
rent a house in which the precedent renters were and were said to be unhappy, and
still the new tenants are H, or at least are perfectly satisfied. But what joins HK’s,
HR’s and our conception of ‘H’ is namely the idea that H is able to exert a power on
human mind’s, reasoning and behaviours. How can we explain away the H-paradox,
i.e. the weird combination of semantic weakness and inferential (valuational) power
of H?

2 Defining Happiness

The problem of hedonic evaluation is a crucial concern of moral and practical philos-
ophy, of the philosophy of mind, and evidently of psychology and cognitive sciences
in general. My aim here is to explore only a part of this complex territory: the one
related to odd or unexpected inferential processes of the kind of HK’s and HR’s case.
The first challenge, in this respect, is the definition of H (what do we share with
HK and HK?). Sometimes researchers hold that there is no need for any explicit
definition,5 but one may reasonably say that the hope of an objective evaluation of
these strange H-cases is misplaced unless we have a shared conception of what we
mean by H. We need a definitional clarification.
What the H-paradox suggests is that there is something in the meaning (content)
of the concept we call ‘H,’ which, despite its multidimensionality, contextuality
and vagueness, involves and activate an impressive amount of positive and negative
intentionality. We are committed to say what exactly, in H, may have this specific
property.6

2.1 Oikeiosis

H is variously conceived as an emotion, a mental state, a value, an enduring or transi-

tory condition, a disposition, etc., occurring for the most disparate reasons and based
on the widest range of sources. ‘The fauna of happiness is very varied. Amusement,
being care-free, comfort, content, delight, elation, enthusiasm, exhilaration, affective
fusion, ecstasy, fun, gaiety, gladness, …’ [17: 134]. Can we explore this wide field?

5Ingelstrom and Der Dejil [13]: 5721.

6Giving a theory of a concept is called nowadays ‘conceptual engineering.’ The meaning of the
concept should be reconstructed and, if it is the case, revised and redefined. What I propose here is
not a complete theory, but a general clarification.
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 69

The HR’s case in this respect may be helpful, because among the (very many)
accounts of H, we find one which is particularly explanatory, and it is the stoic
conception of ‘H’ as oikeiosis (from oikia, ‘house’), which we intend here as.
being at home in the world.7

In this account, H denotes the special condition of a person who is, or rather,
acknowledges herself as being (see Sect. 3.3), at home in her country, in her family,
in her entourage of friends, and evidently, in her house. Oikia means basically house,
edifice, and also family and domestic organization (in a sense, house + home), but
its root generates wide reference:
Oikeios (adjective) may mean ‘of the house’, ‘of the family’, also ‘friend’, ‘faithful’, and
‘personal’, ‘of one’s own’, ‘suitable’, ‘appropriate’
Oikeios (adverb) means ‘in a familiar-friendly way’, ‘amicably’, ‘amiably’, and ‘in an
appropriate and suitable way’, also: ‘properly’, intended as ‘in strict sense’, ‘adequately’
Oikeiotes stands for ‘kinship’, ‘parentage’, ‘affinity’, and also ‘property’, ‘particularity’;
Oikeioo (verb) means to make something-someone familiar, unite amiably, conciliate, adapt,
make friend, make one’s own;
Oikeo (verb) is ‘inhabit’, ‘reside’, ‘occupy’, ‘colonize’, but also ‘have power’, ‘administer’,
‘govern’, ‘make familiar the place in which people live’.

All this can be reduced to the following three areas: the area of familiarity and
friendship; the area of administration and organization of a society, an associated
life; the area of property, in the double sense of belonging, and having adequate
possession. But they all are relative to a place, the comfortable and pleasant endeavour
of familiarity and friendship, the place, which is one’s own place, and in which one is
the owner of one’s own life. If we join them, we have oikeiosis as H in the complete
meaning of the term, with all its political, social (and also empathic) implications.
The notion of oikeiosis, so intended, has special explanatory role in HR’s case.
My assertion (‘I have been H in this place’) is to be read as ‘I felt to be oikeios in
this house’, and it worked as meaning ‘there are features of this house which made
the previous renter feel at home in the world’. The reference is so fundamental, that
the mere name ‘H’ became a grounding valuational factor. The H-factor can hardly
be anticipated by a priori considerations (apparently), but in the oikeiosis sense, it
may have a certain impact on house renting, at the point that not only our personal
H, but also other people’s H may be decisive in increasing or diminishing the value
of a real estate. (Imagine what would have happened if I had said ‘in this house I
have been sad’.) The same may hold for HK: the killers may be seen as having this
meaning in mind when they formed the weird inference, and when they explained
their action by using ‘H’: I am not at home in what is supposed to be my home,
the actual world; other people’s H deprives me of my own space in the world. By
appealing to the notion of oikeiosis we see that H’s action on behaviours is grounded
on an ontological-existential implication: one’s evaluation of being H or not concerns
one’s being, and hence one’s life; being deprived of H means being deprived of life.

7 An accurate analysis of the oikeiosis in Stoic literature is given by Radice [20].

70 F. D’Agostini

And here we find the ‘mortal’ sense of unhappiness and its destructive nature, as
well as the ‘edifying’ role of H in the empirical evaluation of a concrete good.
This account may also give definitional support to what the political theorists of H,
from Adam Smith onwards, have always stressed: that one cannot be H in a country
(or a house) where other people are not happy. The HK confirms this in an extremely
negative sense: you, but more specifically a king, a government, a political party,
could be killed by unhappy people! The HR shows, positively, that other people’s H
might be inspiring, in directing our pursuit of H.

2.2 H and Other Concepts

Our concern here is to look at the problem of H-valuation as a paradigmatic case

for truth-evaluations in general. To this aim, the account of H as oikeiosis should be
specified. We need more theoretical clarifications about the structure of the concept.
As a first move, I suggest referring to the simple account of conceptuality that has
been more or less clearly given by two fathers of modern logic: Frege and Peirce. For
them, a concept is the mental and linguistic function we use to express a property,
i.e. a way of being or acting of objects. (For the general metaphysics which grounds
logic, properties are ways of being of objects, and an object is whatever kind of
entity may have properties.) As a property, the concept is expressed by a predicate.
Thus, we have three terms: concept, property, predicate. In thinking that an object or
a person λ is H (has the property H) we use the conceptual function ‘H’ to denote a
fact or a series of facts concerning λ, then we ascribe the predicate H to λ, so saying
‘λ is H’. This basic account tells us that the ‘logic’ (the semantic behaviour) of value
terms such as H (meaning the notion of ‘being at home in the world’ or in other
meanings), is identical to the behaviour of normal predicates-concepts-properties of
empirical relevance, such as ‘being tall’ or ‘being red’. By speaking of ‘the power’
of super-concepts such as H, we do not mean that other concepts do not have power.
Rather, concepts in general have epistemic and logical power, as they make us think,
believe and reason.
A second move is to consider that when we speak of ‘power’ we should mean
power over (domination) and power to (disposition). Metaphysically speaking, we
can say that concepts-words have epistemic power because and to the extent that they
denote properties of objects (of whatever nature), and properties may be interpreted
as dispositions of objects (to be or develop in a certain or another way), but they also
act ruling our dispositions to believe (or disbelieve) some proposition.
Third, logically speaking, concepts-predicates have power because they have
alethic disposition: their ascription can be true or false. So concepts have the power of
truth.8 The simplest explanation is Frege’s conception of predicates as ‘unsaturated’

8 Clearly, the first power of words is the power of reference, or rather what is called intentionality
or aboutness, because it is in virtue of this power that we have the possibility of thinking or saying
truths or falsities.
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 71

functions, whose role is to produce propositions, so items (of thought) that can be
true or false. The consequence is that we have the empty structure H___, and the
empty place can be filled by some of object (a country, a man, ideally also a house),
and the consequence will be truth or falsity. If we keep to the logical account, and
we move to the epistemic sphere, we see that the alethic disposition of these unsat-
urated entities becomes domination. Concepts via truth make us think in a certain
way and not in another, drive our beliefs in a direction and not in another, lead us to
accept certain propositions and to reject others, etc. Epistemically speaking, concepts
orientate our cognition. But via cognition, they dominate our action. The power to-
becomes power-over, that is, domination, in the full meaning of the term.
The fourth thing that needs to be specified is that concepts-predicates must have
distinguished bearers: things (objects) which can be said (truly or falsely) having the
concept we are speaking about. Not all items of the world can have all the predicates:
for instance a triangle (on normal conditions) cannot be said ‘nervous’ or ‘sad’; and
we say ‘happy days’, but intending the happiness felt by some people in a certain
period of their life, as normally days as such are neither happy nor sad. So we begin
to see that the H-bearers, i.e. the objects which can be truly or falsely said H or not
H, primarily are people, rather, living people, and this is in the line of the existential
notion of oikeiosis. I will better specify this aspect in the next section.

2.3 H as a Reflexive Concept

To explain the paradoxical strength and weakness of the notion of H and the related
H-inferences, the definition of H as oikeiosis requires more technical specifications.
I have given an almost complete account of what we can plausibly mean by ‘the
logic of H’ elsewhere, I only repropose now some of aspects of it, to be applied to
our concern. We can begin by specifying the H-bearer, that is, the object (entity) λ
which can be (truly or falsely) said ‘Hλ.’ In (Sect. 3.2) I have assumed that to be
said H or not, λ needs to be in some condition which putatively provides (or not)
λ’s being or not being at home in the world. But (at least for ‘H’ in the sense of the
three examples of Sect. 2), λ does not only need ‘being’ at home but also feeling of
being at home. HK’s self-judgement and mine had been grounded on our personal
evaluation of our existential situation. This allows us to note first that H has a reflexive
nature, and second that, consequently, the H-bearer must be a person, or some entity
endowed with dispositional reflexivity. The ascription of H to countries or situations
in this account is not completely appropriate: countries and communities in general
are H derivatively; what is directly H in them are individuals. Now we can have the
following specification:
(i) A person λ is said H iff λ feels to be at home in the actual world, and this feeling is the
result of a self-evaluation (λ’s general consideration of λ’s existential situation).

The interesting consequence is that expressions such as

72 F. D’Agostini

(1) He does not know his own happiness

(2) I was happy, but I did not know I was

Are not completely appropriate. We would rather say:

(1’) He is H for our H-parameters but not for his
(2’) For how I now judge ‘H’, I was H, but not for my judgement at that time

Consequently, (1) and (2) are untrue: he is not H, strictly speaking (he lacks self-
evaluation of his potential H) and I was not H (I did not consider my situation H).
Briefly, there must be at least a minimal self-awareness in H-states.
Our question is now ‘what are the supporting data for λ’s (and our) stating that λ is
H?,’ which means: ‘what are the H-makers, the givens that support λ’s consideration
of λ’s oikeiosis?.’ The answer cannot be given a priori. As it is normally conceded,
λ can feel, and consequently be said, to be H for a variety of reasons, given from
a variety of sources. All the sources and reasons normally admitted in the literature
may play, plausibly, as H-makers. The following is just a preliminary list:
Being healthy
Being successful
Being what one believes oneself to be (realizing oneself)
Developing one’s own capacities
Expressing oneself
Flourishing
Having a good soul or a good spirit (eudaimonia)
Having what one wants/desires
Loving oneself and other people
Being loved by friends, relatives, colleagues
Realizing one’s ideal goals
……

Clearly, if we keep to (i), and if we interpret these issues as the reasons a person
may have to judge herself H, each should be anticipated by ‘believing’ or some other
opinion markers (‘believing to be successful, to be loved, to be healthy,’ etc.). So we
can admit (with [17]) that λ might we wrong: λ believes to be loved by λ’s colleagues
or relatives, but she is not, λ’s success is only apparent, etc. However, notably, in
these cases λ will be wrong in her interpretations of facts, but not in her judgement
of these facts as H-makers. Her state description of facts is wrong (untrue) but her
state description of her state of mind might be true (at least if she tells the truth about
herself).9
As suggested in the note 1, H is normally considered a multidimensional and
subjective value. There is a basic inscrutability of the givens which can support λ’s
judgement. Elsewhere I have proposed to adopt the general term of goods, so that
we can advance the following consideration of the H-makers:
(ii) λ’s H-judgement is grounded on certain (unspecified) number of givens, which λ
interprets as goods.

9 She may lie, so she may intend to deceive people or also herself. This imports an interesting shift
in the concept of H that I am reconstructing now, but there is no room here to develop it.
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 73

The specific nature of the H-maker working as goods for λ should remain unspeci-
fied, not only because of the multidimensionality of H (what we consider an H-maker
might be an unhappiness-maker for λ) but also because, given the reflexivity of H,
we cannot exclude the extreme cases of people who are happy to be unhappy, or
unhappy to be happy.10 In these cases, the nature of a certain given occurring in λ’s
life is interpreted by the ideally happy λ as a second order good: it works as H-maker
because and to the extent that it works as an unhappiness-maker, while the unhappy
λ will interpret the H-makers of her life as evil, bad things.
For the Stoics the oikeiosis comes from knowing oneself ,11 in our account this is
only one aspect of H-valuational programs, rather it is captured by (i), i.e. the reflexive
nature of H: to be H and consequently to be said H (independently of the effective
truth of the H-makers evaluation), one should consider one’s own condition. And in
virtue of (ii) we can accept that the range of goods that one may consider sources
(reasons) for H varies from positive self-perception to economic or intellectual or
practical or spiritual or moral flourishing, from self-appropriation (being what one is
becoming to be, as in Heidegger [11] or Sartre [22] to the economics of ‘capabilities’
as ‘fundamental entitlements’ [18], or to what Kant conceived as the only ‘moral
sentiment’, the respect for oneself and one’s own morality. The classical eudaimonia
(having a good spirit driving actions and thoughts) is possibly one of the most general
concepts, but if we keep to the notion of oikeiosis, it does not strictly identify the
H-maker, rather, only one of the hedonic effects of being at home in the world.
Altogether, the givens working as H-makers for λ may belong to a variety of areas:
spiritual, psychological, practical, empirical, juridical, existential.12

2.4 Valuating H

The conception of H here delineated can help us, I believe, in exploring the legitimacy
of H-evaluations, on the part of λ (the putatively happy subject) as well as on the
part of the person who intend to measure λ’s happiness (the H-researcher). What we
should consider is that there is a social (also political) aspect of the oikeiosis, and it
tells us that when we speak of H we speak of a relational condition, a condition one
has under the condition of other people’s existence and proximity. The evaluation of
H is relative, but in the two orthogonal lines: the judgement goes from λ to her life,
and from λ to the surrounding people and their ‘friendship’, ‘amiability’, etc.
The debate about the relativeness of H has developed in a variety of ways, some-
times based on the so-called ‘hedonic treadmill,’ or hedonic adaptation, whereby
it is assumed that people tend to maintain their H-level (‘happiness set point’) at a
constant degree, how the circumstances might be. It has been noted (29) that similar
theories are grounded on mixing up ‘overall happiness’ with ‘contentment’, and in

10 They are namely the cases I have specifically dealt with in d’Agostini [7].
11 See Radice [20].
12 Mulligan [17: 134–135]; see also Haybron [10]; and Landau (2017: Chap. 5).
74 F. D’Agostini

so doing they disprove the objective status of H and wellbeing.13 The notion of H
as oikeiosis, implemented by the specifications (i) and (ii), can also explain hedonic
adaptations in unfortunate cases, since lacking as well as having oikeiosis are due
to feeling or not a certain home-world relation affecting one’s own being. Assuming
the oikeiosis parameter or criterion, we see that empirical factors have less rele-
vance, namely as it happens in the HR’s case.14 Besides that, in the account that
I have proposed, the relativity (subjectivity-contextuality) of H is absorbed by the
neutrality of the existential givens that a person may assume as making herself at
home in the world. They are not specified in advance, but this does not mean that
there cannot be any objectivity, and any truth, in our H-valuations.
In virtue of (ii), the objective judgement of H (whereby ‘λ is H’ is true) is grounded
on second-order subjective conditions. We accept that ‘being H’ is the state of mind
or state of being of a person; that such a state is grounded on more or less positive
(checkable) givens and the person evaluates such conditions as goods for her; more
specifically, as conditions of her feeling of being at home in the place wherein she
is. In this sense, our conception of H can reduce the contrast between subjective
and objective, as we postulate that H is grounded on objectively subjective goods:
we can acknowledge that a certain condition that we would perceive as a source of
unhappiness can work, for λ, in opposite direction, without dispelling the objective
status of overall H-evaluations.15
Finally, for some theorists, H-ascriptions require more than simply ‘positive’
givens, there is an emphasis related to the concept which needs to be justified. A
person can be satisfied by the goods she has, and can evaluate them as real goods,
being so content of them, without being (and being considered) strictly H or non-H.
The existential import of the concept of oikeiosis can solve the problem. When a
person adopts this world-related consideration of herself, she looks at her condition
as grounded ontologically, she sees herself and her life, ultimately, as a good in
itself.16

13 ‘Happiness becomes an evasive and inconsequential matter’ (29, p. 32). Bottan and Perez Truglia
[5] stress that H is ‘autoregressive’ (at least in the sense that it potentiates itself).
14 In other terms H-valuations are objective to the extent that the kind of reality we admit in our alethic

(second order) valuation of H-judgements is not only grounded on empirical givens (traditionally
intended): see Sect. 3.2.
15 See also Bottan and Perez Truglia [5]. Excluding the case of unaware happiness or unhappiness,

we can concede that there might be ‘neither’ people: people who are not ‘H’ but are not ‘not H’
either, to the extent that they do not reflect upon their condition, or at least they do not characterize
their condition in terms of goods in general.
16 This does not mean that there is a supremacy of mere ‘being alive’ over the ‘quality’ of life (the

alleged ‘strong argument’ against abortion, euthanasia, and other bioethical matters). I am simply
noting that happiness and unhappiness are affections concerning the fact of ‘being in the world,’
which is generally acknowledged by H-theorists. For details see Haybron [10].
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 75

3 Valuating Valuations

The primary and unavoidable evaluations are alethic, are truth (T) assignations. We
have seen that judging λ’s H we can only refer to λ’s H-reports, and clearly, to evaluate
the truthfulness of a person’s self-statements is not easy. The usual reference to facts
(the disquotational movement from the said or uttered ‘snow is white’ to the fact
that snow is white) is ineffective. We cannot check the truth of ‘I am happy,’ said
by λ, exploring the facts of λ’s life, as in virtue of (ii), they are not enough: the
H-makers are not ‘facts,’ rather, they are seen-by-λ facts. Ideally, what researchers
can do is to explore λ’s self-judgements about her own life: is λ’s assertion sincere?
does λ really feel to be at home in the actual world (on the basis of love, success,
self-appropriation, or whatever else unspecified good)? The impact of deception and
self-deception in this case is so evident, that one might be tempted to say that there is
no T-assignation in case of H. In this respect the survival of a lively sector concerned
with the science of H, and even the measure of H, would seem inexplicable. Science
requires T, or at least requires the categoricalness of judgement, even if in principle
submitted to potential falsification. In fact, we can explain the relative objectivity of
H-judgements (and similar very controversial cases) by appealing to a quite simple
conception of truth.

3.1 Truth: Transparent Realism

If we keep to the theory of conceptuality summarized in Sect. 2.2, valuating valuations

means to consider whether the ascription of a certain property-predicate to an object-
name is true or not. Any evaluation is, ultimately, alethic, i.e. it is an evaluation of
T, and it is grounded on presupposed or presumable T. So truth is the queen of our
valuational programs and activities. But it has not such an absolute power because
other, potentially rival, concepts are activated, especially in case of value terms, such
as H. There is no need here to expand on the T-theory which underlies the ‘objective
subjectivity’ of the oikeiosis (as I have suggested it). Only some basic references can
be helpful.
What is T as a valuational principle? The answer is typically given by logic.
Aletheic valuation (T-val) is a function which assigns 1 (true) or 0 (false) to a cogni-
tive given (sentence, proposition, belief, etc.: the truthbearer may remain unspec-
ified) on the basis of a pre-described and conventional world-model or structure.
T-assignations are logically required as they rule the act of assuming a certain propo-
sitional content (negative or positive) ‘p.’ And this act is grounded, which means it
is related to the world-model we are postulating.
There is a certain ‘realism’ in logical T,17 at least minimally intended as ruled
by the Independence Thesis: there must be a world-model of (semantic) facts which

17The normal reference for ‘logical realism’ is to the so-called T-schema [8], but there is no need to
deepen this point here. The kind of transparent realism I am presenting relies on an interpretation of
76 F. D’Agostini

supports our T-ascriptions. This is not far from what we mean by T in extra-logical
contexts, but for the fact that our extra-logical model is reality, i.e. the world as
we conceive it. Our T-valuations now are not to be supported (validated, verified)
by a conventional pre-constructed model, but by the actual world. The ‘big model’
is in some way pre-constructed, but in a distinct way: it is the world ‘as we see
and conceive it,’ so the judgement must appeal to a pre-logical judgement about the
structure of ‘reality’ (possible, actual, consisting of material or spiritual, hard or soft
facts).
This connection between logic and metaphysics, whereby the latter works as a
pre-logical domain, which prepares and grounds logical choices, is not universally
shared, but has the merit of making us see why we accept HK’s explanation of his
reasoning as somehow grounded on the extremely powerful action of H. Now we
may say that the objectivity of the H-valuational program is submitted to the effective
connection of the state description ‘I am H’ or ‘I am not H’ to the series of subsisting
H-makers, or of ‘λ is H’ or ‘λ is not H’ to the reliability of λ’s judgement. In both
cases, something ‘out there’ is to be presupposed: there must be something which
makes these statements true, some truthmaker. The functional movement which
connects truthbearers to their respective truthmakers is the evaluation, and in any
case it works in the above-mentioned way. Expressing the T-valuation of ‘p’ by |p|,
we have |p| = 1 iff there is some fact p in the world.
The world we are speaking about, especially in concrete cases, in which we
have houses to be rented and real people who may kill other people for the weirdest
reasons, is the actual world. This is the big world of T-ascriptions, but its metaphysical
constitution is not given, because there can be T about an unspecified variety of things,
in an unspecified variety of contexts, with reference to unspecified contents. See a
quite simple example:
the prosecutor says ‘the defendant knew that the girl was a minor, actually, he had been a
family friend for many years’

How can the prosecutor evaluate another persons’ cognitive status (i.e. tell the
truth about this open and vague part of reality)? Is the supporting premise (the
defendant had been a family friend) enough? The barrister may contend that in fact
the defendant could still ignore the decisive information, but in both cases we can
say that the conclusion is true or untrue in the plain realistic meaning of the term:
the defendant knew, or did not, and we can say he did or not, even if the truthmaker
is located in the area of the defendant’s beliefs, it does not belong to the physical
(‘external’) world.
So this is the first useful acquisition: alethic evaluations (is ‘p’ true?) are grounded
on an independent though unspecified reality, including direct and indirect evidence, a
variety of deductively, inductively or also abductively inferred contents, which forms
the widest domain of truthmakers. The wideness of the alethic world (the world of
our T-evaluations) explains the relative objectivity of subjective judgements.

the T-schema in the line of alethic realism and truthmaker theory (as in Alston [1] and Armstrong
[3].
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 77

The HR believed I had been H in the house, and her judgement was grounded on
the powerful reference of the notion of H, as well as on the authenticity of my propo-
sitional attitude, captured by what can be called H-empathic perception.18 These
aspects worked as facts (truthmakers) making her belief true. The HK (truly or
falsely) believed his victim was H, and his H-judgement was (at least pretendedly)
grounded on sharing some unspecified real givens of the world, which he presumably
interpreted as denoting H. In both cases, the metaphysical support which provides
truthmaker is the shared world, in which people may or might not be ‘at home.’
Sharing a world means sharing all aspects of it. The empathic judgements of HK and
HR were grounded on parts of the world which are no less ‘real’ than others.

3.2 Truth: From Subsistence to Acceptance

Models in logic are conventional worlds or structures of worlds, the big model of our
extra-logical T-ascriptions embraces conventions as well as real facts, of whatever
kind. This can be furtherly justified by the second aspect of T which deserves to be
considered.
T-valuations, like valuations in general, are epistemic (cognitive) processes. The
mere subsistence of the state p as such is not enough to inform the process in virtue of
which we give ‘p’ the value 1. This can be intended as meaning that alethic evaluations
are nor mere acknowledgments of the subsistence of some facts, but assignations of
yes or no to items (of language, of cognition), whereby ‘yes’ marks the acceptance
of a cognitive content (and rejection of the opposite). Besides T-accordance (to a
more or less conventional world), now we have T-acceptance, i.e. the ‘yes’ we give
to a cognitive content.
‘Yes’ might be said for a variety of reasons, with reference to a variety of subjects,
with a variety of epistemic strength. But our alethic (T-related) ‘yes’ cannot be simple
carefree ‘yes’ (or no), rather a heavy ‘yes,’ based on accordance to a semantic or
metaphysical conception of facts. And this should work for logic as well for our
usual valuational schemes. The formal yes we implicitly propose when we assume
a premise is not far from the heavy yes we mean when we say that ‘p’ is T. This
substantial affinity of logical and extra-logical (epistemic, doxastic, pragmatic) uses
of ‘T’ is perfectly acceptable, if we consider that, as we have seen, the realism implied
by T is ontologically transparent. The function T relates beliefs or sentences to an
unspecified world, which could be a model, a structure of possible worlds, but also
the actual world, the unspecified set of all potential truthmakers, among which we
also have λ’s beliefs and feelings, so also the truthmakers for λ’s being said H.
I use the expression ‘heavy yes’ to mean that the assumption (acceptance-
assertion) of a given content p implies some commitment, and specifically the
commitment to accept the inferable consequences of p, as well as to reject all what

18Empathy as an objective (T-related) feature is especially defended by the phenomenological

approach of Edith Stein (see Stein [23]).
78 F. D’Agostini

would imply the negation of p. This last aspect, which logicians sometime call ‘exclu-
sion principle’ (if ‘p’ is true then ‘not p’ must be untrue-false) is a consequence of
the ontological-realistic impact of T. Possibly, we may assume that an entity has
opposite properties, but we cannot admit that the same fact subsists and does not
subsist at the same time and in the same respect (of ‘being’, of ‘subsisting’).

3.3 Yes, No, Yes but …, I Do Not Know

Concepts have powers (Sect. 2.2), and their typical ‘power-over,’ i.e. dominion, is
due to their being conveyers of truth or falsity. Is there any possibility of having
definite and hence heavy ‘yes’ in case of H-ascriptions? Modern T-theorists say that
truth is transparent, which means (in some respect) that its failure or success depend
on the concepts (predicates) involved in the truthbearer. So the alethic evaluation ‘it
is true that λ is H’ inherits the same uncertainty of the concept of H.
What gives special and unexpected force to the action of value terms such as ‘H’
is their wideness, which in terms of evaluation means they have the mentioned series
of problematic second order properties:
– relativity (H-judgement is subjective)
– multidimensionality (H is an internally complex concept, composed by a number
of different factors-givens)
– and we may add now that H has also structural vagueness, which means,
technically, that the borders or limits between H and non-H are not well defined.
In virtue of this third aspect we ought to concede that H-valuations (being suscep-
tible of quantified-metrological analyses) are not H-yes = 1 or H-no = 0; they range
from 0 to 1, there is a wide central region of neither H nor non-H, or a central region
of intermediate both H and not H states. Our simple, classical yes-or-no program
(with not both and not neither) seem to fail.
Vagueness is at first the property of predicates that do not have precise borders,
so that the ascription of the vague predicate P to and object-name λ is ‘intrinsically
uncertain.’ As Peirce specifies: ‘by intrinsically uncertain we mean not uncertain in
consequence of any ignorance of the interpreter, but because the speaker’s habits
of language were indeterminate’ (Peirce 1902, p. 748). So intended, vagueness is a
problem for the ‘yes or no, not both and not neither’ typical of T in classical logic.
We are not able to give ‘yes’ to a certain evaluation because the border of the ascribed
predicate is not given: the extension and the anti-extension of the property are not
well-delineated. Or rather, as Peirce notes: our ‘habits of language’ do not allow for
clear delimitation.
Some concepts are typically vague, which means they tolerate borderline cases, in
which a property P and its anti-extension not P are to be ascribed to the same entity.
In these cases we have the semantic problem of vagueness ‘how if all should the
usual semantics for a precise language be modelled so as to allow for the presence of
vague terms?’. But the relevant point is that to a certain extent all concepts are vague
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 79

or become vague in specific contexts. The generalization of vagueness is one of the

central themes of the contemporary debate. In particular, Priest [19, pp. 9–10] notes
that vagueness pervades all the predicates we use to describe the world. And there
is also vagueness in our attempts to make languages ‘precise,’ in how we evaluate
and reduce vagueness. So we have vagueness of truth, of meaningfulness, etc. and
clearly, vagueness of vagueness.19
In Peirce’s quotation, we find that there is at least another source of uncertainty,
and it is the case of uncertainty for ignorance, or incomplete information. In this case,
the yes–no process fails, but not necessarily (or directly) for the ‘intrinsic’ vagueness
of the case, but for our personal lacking information. This source of uncertainty is
generally treated by probabilistic logic, which is the usual logic which rules beliefs
and knowledge. What joins vagueness as ‘intrinsic uncertainty’ and probabilism, as
‘epistemic uncertainty’ is that the truth values become gradualized, we do not have
1 or 0 (mere yes—mere no) evaluations, but degrees of truth, or ideally infinite T-
values. In consideration of this, it is assumed that the range of our alethic evaluations
must significantly change, we have a scale of values (T-degrees) from 0 to 1, with
intermediate values, in unspecified number (0.1, 0.2… 0.8, 0.9).
The progression holds for our alethic evaluations of conceptual ascriptions, so
in virtue of the nature of the concept and our ‘semantic habits’, as Pierce specifies,
but we should postulate that the degrees also express the uncertainty due to the
incompleteness of our information about possible ascriptions, and thus, epistemic
uncertainty and graduality of our beliefs. What H-measures measure is the graduality
of λ’s H, in virtue of both the intrinsic vagueness of the concept and the limit of
our information about λ. While the former specifically affects λ’s judgement about
herself, the latter is the typical concern of the researcher. In both cases T-val are
uncertain. And in both cases, the problem is the cut off , which is, in practice, the
problem of finding the exact point, in the continual series of alethic degrees, which
is able to give us a definite ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ In case of H, we have seen it is also a
multidimensional concept, which implies more than one scale, possibly one for each
of the proposed issues of 2.3 and for each valuation of given goods. For instance,
‘success,’ as H-maker, works from 0 (no success) in a continual progression to 1
(extreme and evident success), and this holds for all the H-makers. Consequently,
there will be a progression of no-H becoming yes-H. Notably, in virtue of (i) we say
the graduality primarily affects λ’s judgement: her judgement about her success is
affected by λ’s uncertainty about the notion of ‘success’ as well as her uncertainty
about her own beliefs.
This kind of valuational gradualism is substantially faithful to the current concep-
tions of knowledge. Our rationality normally accepts graduality, intended as due to
the evidence of vagueness (and hence ideally ruled by fuzzy logic or other logic
of vagueness), as well as to the epistemic uncertainty of our judgements, grounded

19 In consideration of this, Varzi [24] acknowledges that maybe we do not need a particular (non-
classical?) semantics,maybe the message is more radical. The problem of vagueness (and of the
typical related paradox, the sorites) ‘arises at a deep and fundamental level, one that appears to be
prior to the engagement of any logical and semantic paraphernalia’ [24, p. 37]. I have labelled this
‘prior level’ prelogical; Hanna [9, pp. 46–49 and 230–231] calls it ‘protologic’.
80 F. D’Agostini

on incomplete information (normally ruled by probabilistic logic). In both cases the

heavy yes of our second order (alethic) evaluations inevitably requires specifying
a cut-off point in the progression. We must admit that some values are acceptable,
other are not. So the assumption of a certain standard value as negative or positive
limit is imposed. Supposing our standard is 0.8, we have the region of definite yes,
and from 0 to 0.2 the region of definite no, while the central region is the nuanced
domain of uncertain and vague evaluations: the domain of yes but also no (contra-
dictory evidence), and the region of ‘I do not know whether yes or no’, so of ‘neither
yes nor no’.20 Does this mean that there is no T-val at all, eventually?

3.4 How Truth Survives the Uncertainty of Judgement

As I have mentioned, with H we have multidimensionality, relativeness, and vague-

ness. The multidimensional nature of H tells us that the general H-judgement is given
by transversal (orthogonal) considerations of different scales, possibly with different
pre-fixed standards. The intrinsic uncertainty of our semantic habits related to H
(vagueness strictly speaking) tells us that we do not have, in principle, the cut-off
point which gives us the exact boundary between H and non-H. And the relativeness
of H recalls the second form of valuational uncertainty, i.e. the subjectivity of H-
judgements, due to the condition (i), the reflexivity of H-statements, which distorts
valuations as ‘λ is H’ must be grounded on what λ says of herself, so it is forcibly
affected by incompleteness. Finally, even if we select a standard whatsoever, we
always remain with the intermediate nuanced judgement wherein any definite ‘yes’
or ‘no’ seems implausible and unfaithful to facts.
Is this the ultimate image of what really happens in our H-evaluations and in
T-evaluations in general? It should be noted that the central area of ‘both’ (yes and
no) and ‘neither’ (I do not know) express the domain of options related to T, but it
does not express the action of T as ruling acceptance, assertions, and assumptions.
Classical truth, i.e. the categoricalness of our judgements, whereby we give heavy
yes to certain propositions or scientific results, rejecting the opposite, survives the
vagueness of concepts and the incompleteness of knowledge.21
The first consideration is that despite the vagueness of predicative habits (which
imports the uncertainty of contradictory cases) and despite incomplete information
(which seems to imply the failure of truth), our use of concepts and use of knowledge
works undisturbed. We are still able to formulate reasoning and be understood, and

20 The four options are currently accepted in philosophical logic. The classical cases of only yes/
only no evaluations (just true–just false) are implemented by paracomplete logics, which admit of
neither yes nor no, so truth value gaps (this case is labelled ‘I do not know’, but allegedly there
might be other reasons for gappy judgements), and paraconsistent logics, which admit of yes and
no’ so truth value gluts (without ‘explosion’, i.e. without the triviality of ‘everything is true’, a result
normally ascribed to the rule of Detachment, less frequently to Simplification). Recent details about
this (and the role of Simplification) are to be found in Ripley [21].
21 For details about this see d’Agostini [6].
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 81

act consequently. The H-paradox can teach us something in this respect. How can
HK and HR judge other people’s happiness? Clearly, they did not stop to reflect on
the multidimensionality, vagueness and subjectivity of the concept. They only felt
the dominion of H over their life. Thus, even in cases of concepts like H, whose
systematic ambiguity is evident, we are still able to say yes, no, and not both, not
neither.
The second consideration is methodological, it regards the philosophy underlying
the science of appraisal. We see that the difficult art of alethic evaluation should
consider its own limits, so is always a critical and self-critical art. But this does not
mean that valuational processes are illegitimate: rather, they are perfectly legitimate,
and rather, if possible, more necessary. This is eventually what the weird combination
of semantic weakness (equivocity) and practical strength in case of H can teach us.22
The pursuit of H can still be thought as a fundamental human right, because if we
do not accept it, we risk complete irrationality in our H-judgements.
More importantly, if we fail to safeguard and protect this right for ourselves and
other people we still risk mortal events, normally less serious than the ones produced
by the HK, but sometimes, in the long run, equally worrying.

4 Summary and Concluding Remarks

The main concern of this paper was to reflect about the art or science of evaluation,
with special reference to a concept, such as H (happiness), which seems to be hardly
adaptable to alethic (truth-related) evaluations. Here is thus the first problem: can we
arrive at an objective evaluation of ascriptions involving not only subjective, but also
multidimensional, vague, contextual, concepts? The second problem is: how do we
explain the fact that the use of concepts which have all these disturbing second-order
properties may exert destructive as well as edifying effects on our behaviours?
The case of H is especially challenging, as it is sometimes assumed that there is
no objective H-status, which means there is no alethic (truth-oriented) evaluation of
H, and no consistency or contradiction whatsoever in the attitude or state of mind we
call H. But it is also consistently assumed that H is an extremely powerful concept,
it has a decisive impact on the life of individuals as well as societies. Unhappiness is
intended to mark the decadence of a country, of a life, also of a house. Happiness is
the mark of flourishing, wellbeing, capacities, cognitive acquisitions, etc., for persons
as well as for communities. In virtue of this positive intentionality H can be seen as
one of the super-concepts which inform the values and virtues of human life, such
as justice, friendhood, goodness. And not by chance it informs a (human) right, in
terms of ‘the pursuit of H.’

22 How would we be able to measure the effective value of a real estate totally forgetting the impact
of vague and multidimensional factors such as H? How could we consider and prevent the effects
of social unhappiness?
82 F. D’Agostini

I have suggested considering first the ancient notion of oikeiosis, in the meaning
of ‘being at home in the world’ and so ‘H’ as the feeling of being at home in one’s
own place, in one’s life. In this account we see that H has cognitive and practical
power, in a double sense: as power-disposition (power to-) and power-domination
(power over-). I have also noted that all concepts may have these two kinds of power,
both globally intended as alethic powers, to the extent that concepts are able to
orientate our evaluations in terms of yes or no, belief acceptance or rejection, on
the basis of truthmakers, facts that we find in the world. I have also recalled that,
as it has been noted by the contemporary theorists of vagueness, all concepts, in
special conditions, may present semantic vagueness, and ultimately, even the tools
we use to reduce vagueness are vague. So the paradoxical combination of power and
uncertainty we find in H seems to be a feature of all concepts. Our science-art of
appraisal seems doomed to fail, systematically.
But this is not the last passage. The really surprising aspect of the word-concepts
we use to describe reality, ourselves, and our values, is that despite their vagueness,
and the difficulty of finding the absolute ‘cut off’ which distinguishes truth from
falsity, yes from no, acceptance from rejection, we can use them as if there were
no problem of vagueness-uncertainty at all. And we can still use their power over our
minds in the most absurd, or dangerous, or inspiring ways. The special ‘happiness’
in the art of appraisal is the ability to conciliate the self-aware consideration of the
valuational uncertainty to the categoricalness of judgement.

References

1. Alston W (1996) A realistic conception of truth. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (NY)
2. Annas J (2004) Happiness as achievement. Daedalus 133(2):44–51
3. Armstrong DM (2004) Truth and truthmakers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
4. Berto F, Jago M (2019) Impossible worlds. Oxford University Press, Oxford
5. Bottan N, Perez Truglia R (2011) Deconstructing the hedonic treadmill: is happiness
autoregressive? J Socioecon 40:224–236
6. d’Agostini F (2021) Conjunctive paraconsistency. Synthese 199:6845–6874 (open access).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03096-6
7. d’Agostini F (2022) Happy unhappiness (and other stratified contradictions). Philosophia.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-022-00524-w
8. Dummett M (1993) The seas of language. Oxford University Press, Oxford
9. Hanna R (2006) Rationality and logic. MIT Press, Cambridge (Mass)
10. Haybron D (2020) Happiness. In: Zalta EN (ed) The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/happiness/
11. Heidegger M (1927) Being and time. (Engl. Trans. Macquarrie J, Robinson E). Blackwell,
Oxford
12. Howard GS (1994) Why do people say nasty things about self-reports? J Organ
13. Ingelstrom M, van Der Dejil W (2021) Can happiness measures be calibrated? Synthese
199(2021):5719–5746
14. Johns H, Ormerod P (2007) Happiness, economics and public policy. Inst Econ Aff Res Monogr
62
15. Kaminitz SC (2018) Happiness studies and the problem of interpersonal comparisons of
satisfaction: two histories, three approaches. J Happiness Stud 19(2):423–442
Evaluating Valuations: The Case of Happiness as Oikeiosis 83

16. MacKerron G (2012) Happiness economics from 35,000 feet. J Econ Surv 26(4):705–735
17. Mulligan K (2016) Happiness, luck and satisfaction. Argumenta 1(2):133–145
18. Nussbaum M (2003) Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Fem
Econ 9(2–3):33–59
19. Priest G (2003) A site for Sorites. In: Beall JC (ed) Liars and heaps. Oxford University Press,
Oxford, pp 9–23
20. Radice R (2000) Oikeiosis. Ricerche sul fondamento del pensiero stoico e sulla sua genesi.
Vita e Pensiero, Milano
21. Ripley D (2015) Paraconsistent logic. J Philos Log 44(6):771–780
22. Sartre J-P (1943) Being and nothingness (Engl. transl. Barnes HE). Methuen, London
23. Stein E (1989) On the problem of empathy (Engl. Transl Stein W) Collected works of Edith
Stein, vol 3. ICS Publications, Washington 1989 (German original 1917).
24. Varzi A (2003) Cut-offs and their neighbours. In: JC Beall (ed) Liars and heaps. Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp 24–38
Values and Evaluation

Domenico Patassini

Abstract The dizzying growth of human settlements generates unseen conflicts and
challenges existing value systems in the domains of spatial planning, management
and real estate. Valuation practices have long been called upon to set aside seem-
ingly acceptable paradigms in which they operated with questionable effectiveness.
Compared to the past, the search for and recognition of values under conditions
of global risk and radical pluralism do become a priority. It is increasingly urgent
to recognize new classes and dimensions of value, but above all to know how to
put them into action as unpredictable social coefficients. The increasingly hybrid
social interactions change the concepts of public, common or market good, testing
the mainstream theories of utility and the very way of looking at the role of public
administration. The following notes seek to explain how values do not exist in and
of themselves, but are blossoming in their action. This invites valuation practices
to understand the genesis of values, their phenomenology and to construct updated
cognitive pathways.

Keywords Value · Polisemy and pluralism · Values in action · Value judgement ·

Action oriented evaluation

D. Patassini (B)
University IUAV, 30135 Venice, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 85

S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_7
86 D. Patassini

1 Hints from Real Estate Valuation

Valuation1 recognizes sources, bases and dynamics of economic/financial values

within specific classes of real estate assets.2 It allows to assess functional efficiency
of spatial morphologies of human settlements and its trade-offs in relation to equity,
sustainability and resilience. Sources, bases and dynamics of value are key words to
identify the systemic function of an asset, a pluralist perception of its attributes, the
meaning of its appreciation (or depreciation) and related risks.3
From the very beginning, human settlements have been both the source and
outcome of a dynamic and changing relationship between ‘fixity’ and ‘movement’.
As fixity of spatial morphologies is reinforced, the movement of people, goods,
services, data and information tends to speed up. This relationship comes with specific
‘gradients’ that may have different impacts and eco-systemic footprints, depending
on the technological development of the two components. Moreover, it is strongly
correlated to the degree of openness and connection to global networks. The history
of the city and of spatial disciplines (which real estate valuation belongs to) is also
a history of such gradients. Valorisation processes therefore intertwine with these
gradients that occur within economic, social and environmental scenarios.4
In its essence, valuation is a search for value. Evidences come from “validation
efforts” of estimation procedures5 (analytical, comparative, econometric, elicitation,

1 This paper summarizes and resets teaching materials of the “Culture of evaluation” course at the
Bachelor’s Degree in Spatial Planning, Iuav University of Venice (Italy), 2015–2021. The materials
are available from the IUAV website and were updated early 2019: http://www.iuav.it/Ateneo1/
docenti/docenti201/Patassini-/materiali-/valutazione-come-filosofia-pratica-2020.pdf, http://www.
iuav.it/Ateneo1/docenti/docenti201/Patassini-/materiali-/rassegna-approcci-e-metodi-2020.pdf.
2 The main classes are defined by gradients of exclusion and rivalry and include market and public

goods, common and club goods. The two gradients define specific value domains and require
different estimation procedures, see Hess and Ostrom [14].
3 Recent directives on risk, profitability and climate change (Cc) are leading European credit institu-

tions to improve their property valuation process, using new data and analytical modelling. Relations
between banks and real estate sectors are usually affecting the stability of financial systems. The
European Banking Authority (Eba) is improving the efficiency of the entire bank credit value chain,
considering real estate valuation impacts over all the steps. Efficiency and standardization in esti-
mation methodologies are increasing by using big data and automated valuation models (Avm) in
real time. Following the market comparison approach, Avm helps to estimate in real time market
values of geo-referenced properties, including values of related guarantees with specific confidence
intervals.
4 The growing attention to the green economy places the environmental and climate sustainability

issues at the core, by estimating impacts of different types of risk on real estate values and collateral.
Worth saying that real estate has significant balance sheet effects within credit institutions. As owners
of large real estate assets, their re-valuations can generate significant capital gains.
5 Recently, real estate valuations have sought a fairness that goes beyond prudential supervision to

become a constitutive element of civil law.

Values and Evaluation 87

hedonic, systemic6 ) as well as from rating exercises.7 Contrary to the past, the search
now adopts utilitarian models. Renewed awareness and issues help to mitigate their
strong assumptions, opening to pluralist approaches. Such approaches highlight the
polysemic dimension of value, and its being an ‘action’ and ‘process’ (not merely
an asset attribute). In social interactions, from which valuation demands and issues
arise, a not so obvious concept of ‘public’ emerges, conferring new roles to state-
market relations [24]. The expansion of ‘public value’ concept tends to capture
externalities (de facto de-legitimizing them), entrusting value judgments to an idea
of incompleteness.8

2 Polysemy

In philosophy and social sciences a very heated debate on values generates outcomes
that are not generally accepted. Suffice it to say that Weber contrasts the neo-Kantian
metaphysics of values with a ‘normative transcendence’, the latter being regarded as
irreplaceable guides for action, although potentially a source of inescapable conflicts.
Croce, who was focusing on technical and economic judgments, considers value as
a pseudo-concept, an empirical construct, a spiritual dimension.
‘Value’ is a polysemic term exposed to eclecticism, relativism and dizzying axio-
logical swinging.9 Polysemy is mainly due to variations in hierarchies of values,
causes of crises, behavioural changes, paradigmatic leaps or ideological statements.
In late Latin, the term valere extends its semantic field to people and communities,
habitats and species, resources, actions and effects, but also objects. Greater focus
on people, communities and their practices emphasizes virtues and abilities, while
a renewed focus on habitats, species and resources acknowledges life cycles, the
support and provisioning role of environmental and ecosystem services. The avail-
ability, usefulness and costs of the objects can thus come to be appreciated. Over
time, whatever is worthy of choice (in the broadest sense) or conforms to nature will
start taking on value.

6 THE system modelling may refer to two paradigms of urban and regional sciences: the first
considers the flows as dependent variables of locations; the second recognizes locations as dependent
variables of flows (a sort of domination of flows over places). Batty focuses on the modelling effects
of second paradigm, see Batty [2]. The role of information in valuation models is analysed by
McDonald [22].
7 Condominium rating practices also refer to valuation and appraisal practices. In this case, rating

is a ‘social’ classification procedure with attribution of liveability primarily based on opinions of

administration, tenants and neighbours, but also on physical-functional performances of the property
and its maintenance status. The classification may become part of a multi-year certification system
considering also environmental contexts. Classification procedures are supplied by many apps that
work as virtual meeting places for tenants and can bring out different value perspectives.
8 UNCERTAINTY of theories, incompleteness of answers and judgments are the only certain

outcome, but at the same time a hint of plausibility, a sort of process effectiveness that help to
proceed with the analysis and adjust the theories, see Veca [41], four lectures on incompleteness.
9 From the Greek ¥ξιoς, valid, worthy and λóγoς, proposition, reason.
88 D. Patassini

Through his comparative studies Kluckhohn10 identifies three components of

value. The first is affective and denotes the desirable along a continuum of approval
and disapproval, satisfaction and dissatisfaction. As Durkheim aptly emphasizes,
violation of the rules and values that sediment in the ‘collective consciousness’ or,
with less claim, in the ‘collective maps’, can generate stigma, punishment or shame
and therefore exclusion in various situations. The second component of value is the
cognitive one. It points towards possible, and not necessarily comparable, concep-
tions of value: X can be good, legitimate, just, plausible with very different degrees
of meaning. The third component of value is the ‘conative’ one. It calls up selective
actions and vitality that values have in guiding and conditioning. This is the most
‘active’ component in formulating value judgments that can benefit from domains
or conditions of validity created by related components. No general lexicographic
relationship among the three components of value emerges even if, in practice, the
interaction may take on its own shape and a binding meaning to become value itself.
Values are thus ‘conceived as consciously chosen references that guide conduct
and give meaning to actions’.11 From this awareness and assimilation, the ‘scales
of values’ emerge as social coefficients that inform practices and simultaneously
highlight how human beings cannot be a ‘measure of all things’.

3 Upside Down

A partial or distorted gaze can hide or highlight relevant components of value. In The
Picture of Dorian Gray [42] Oscar Wilde says: ‘Nowadays, people know the price
of everything but they don’t know the value of anything’. Price could be replaced by
any unit of measure or equivalence, reaffirming this aporia, depriving the evaluative
function of what gives meaning to it: values. When unable to define them, the func-
tion collapses. All together and at the same time, the meta-criteria of plausibility,
coherence, efficiency, effectiveness, equity, sustainability and alike start weakening.
Even processes and effects begin to be entrusted to too many or too few degrees of
freedom, depending on the perspective.
In economics, value is action and process. It is a production of goods and services
(tangible or intangible), capable of strengthening the ecosystem which it belongs
to and accounting for any positive externalities. When production weakens the
ecosystem and the balance of related externalities becomes negative, negative values
are generated.
Until the mid-nineteenth century, most economists12 believed that an ‘objective’
theory of value was needed to explain prices of goods and services. The theory

10 Kluckhohn [17], pp. 116–132. See also Kluckhohn [18].

11 Galantino [10], article on the meanings of ‘value’ term.
12 LEAVING ancient thought in the background, theories of value have developed dynamically in

economics since the seventeenth century. They have evolved along with technological changes,
division of labour and the organization of society. Mercantilists were interested in trade and the
amount of gold that was produced, the sale of goods and competitiveness. Physiocrats recognized
Values and Evaluation 89

considered conditions of production such as land, time and quality of work, capital
intensity, fixed and variable costs, technology, environment, social formations and
contractual capacities: in short, specific and contextual features. The theory of value
was therefore anchored to specific factors, rather than strictly ‘objective’. But, with
the emergence of utilitarian paradigms, the approach began to reverse, without ever
recovering. It remained upside down as it waited for a stimulus, that never came.
According to these paradigms, value should be determined by scarcity (‘your value
reflects the scarcity of supplies’), by the prices paid on the ‘market’ and therefore
the willingness to pay. If value was formerly defined ‘within’ the above-mentioned
conditions to metabolize its meanings, now value ‘is in the eye of the beholder’.13
Price determines the value but deprives it of its semantic and ethical domain to
transform it into pure metrics.14
Previously, distributive hypotheses took on importance by contributing to the
formation of value and related conflicts; nowadays, the same hypotheses would
justify questionable mechanisms of appropriation and extraction, freed from pertinent
judgments of merit.15 The inability to distinguish ‘creators’ from ‘value extractors’
makes it rather difficult to compare rent to profit. Moreover, it stresses accounting
models along with the notion of equilibrium. If ‘everything happens in the interest of
everyone’, competitive markets would only bring ‘optimal’ results for everyone: that
is, Pareto-efficient/optimal conditions in which no one can improve their life without

the value of agricultural labour, adopting Quesnay’s first systematic theory of value in an economy
conceived as a ‘metabolic’ system: if the extraction of value by unproductive actors outweighs
the creation of value by productive actors of the society the growth stops. The value was created
around a ‘production boundary’. The classics recognized the value of industrial work, the concept
of surplus value. In this case, the value becomes closely associated with the costs of production and
reproduction (of the labour force conceived as capacity) and the values determine the prices. The
neoclassicals give up this approach by privileging the subjective preferences of economic actors,
thus overturning the value-price relationship. According to them, it is the value based on utility
that determines production costs and therefore prices (see Mazzucato [21], in particular chapter
one). With the subjective theory of value of marginalism, every income becomes a reward for a
productive activity and every action must be evaluated on the basis of its consequences in a given
context. Consequentialism is one of the characteristics of utilitarian ethics.
13 Mazzucato [21], ivi. One of the central topics of the text is the ‘production boundary’, its historical

interpretation in relation to the growth of financial sector and frenzied short-term earnings. The
author also explains how the role of creator of value of public sector has been widely underestimated
by the so-called ‘creators of wealth’.
14 IN the transition from political economy to economics, new concepts such as shareholder value,

shared value, value chain, value for money (optimal combination of costs and value of service
delivery systems), adding value (not to be confused with value added) emerge. The same term
valuation (already used by Dewey [7] and other pragmatists at the beginning of the twentieth
century) is reduced to an estimating practice, in support of real estate assessment procedures being
perfected. The concept of value for money has significantly influenced cost–benefit analysis and
variants of critical utilitarianism: see, for example, Lichfield [20] and Moroni [26] critical notes.
15 The assumption ‘what is bought has value’ changes the boundaries between productive and unpro-

ductive domains and dissolves the concept of rent, as the history of economic thought testifies. The
assumption expels the government itself and, to some extent, also public spending from the domain
of production, limiting the effectiveness of the concept of multiplier and of public expenditure itself.
The public creditor is not necessarily a preferred creditor.
90 D. Patassini

worsening someone else’s.16 When this does not happen, it is due to imperfections
or obstacles to the functioning of the free market.

4 A Maimed State

According to this approach public administration should never intervene in the

economy and its related domains, except when the market fails generating exter-
nalities (positive or negative). This suggestion is debatable for a series of reasons,
the most significant being the impossibility to divide social life into distinct domains
and attribute goods and services to independent classes.
With some authority, the public choice theory, whose most distinguished represen-
tatives is Nobel Prize winner J. Buchanan [4], states that public administration fail-
ures are more worrisome than market failures. Political institutions should therefore
make sure that benefits of regulation outweigh the costs of state failures, assuming
that there is a trade-off between the two. As generally known, the supervisory role
is systematically questioned whenever economy dominates political institutions.
Managing trade-off implies correcting positive (as those attributable to the effects of
state-funded basic research) and negative externalities (as environmental or health
costs).
The theory of public choice, which stems from marginalism, is based on the
assumption that the State should interfere as little as possible, and that any public–
private partnerships should only work in accordance with this hypothesis. This often
occurs in project financing, service delivery, urban fiscality and when applying
equalizing or compensatory schemes in statutory spatial planning. According to
new public institutional economics, public administration thus begins to emulate the
private sector, emphasizing service efficiency, financial intermediation and regulatory
devices. Even evaluation languages and designs, responsibility and accountability
change with outsourcing and the privatization of public activities. It is worth noting
that the market failure theory assumes that markets are the most efficient resource
allocation mechanisms under three conditions: firstly, there must be a complete
system of markets, and goods and services must be sold at known prices; secondly,
consumers and producers must behave competitively; thirdly, a general equilibrium
can be achieved. The risk of not meeting these three conditions is so high that failure
is very likely.
A weakened concept of value has favoured its abuse and replacement with ques-
tionable elicitation procedures and a progressive flattening towards contingency. For
example, elicitation procedures (typical of contingency analysis) estimate bid prices,
willingness to pay (wtp) or to accept compensation (wta) on the basis of a hypothetical

16 Pareto argues that maximization does not require a notion of cardinal utility: an ordinal utility
should suffice. Taking up the criticisms of A Sen, it would be a relative optimal point. The difficult
task of compensating for the absolute utility differentials, that characterize social inequalities, would
thus be entrusted to the maximization of ordinal utility. However, the ordinal scale, unlike the interval
or ratio scale, dulls the trade-offs.
Values and Evaluation 91

marginal utility attributed to goods and services in conditions of scarcity. Marginalists

call it the ‘theory of utility value’. Applied to estimate total production of an economy
in terms of value or ‘wealth’, it requires that all subjects (producers and consumers)
take action as perfect and rational calculators of utility. Yet, behavioural economics
and such authors as Tversky and Kahneman repeatedly question whether individual
can act in such a way.17 A second and unlikely condition is that no interference
modifies the equilibrium of perfect competition.
With the cumulative prospect theory (Cpt) Tversky and Kahneman suggest a
descriptive alternative to the theory of expected utility, based on empirical evidence
obtained via experiments in cognitive psychology. While theory of expected utility
calls for ideal (normative) conditions for a rational decision, Cpt highlights how
subjects make decisions in conditions of risk and not only of bounded knowledge.
Generally, they are influenced by the ‘context/environment effect’, aversion to losses
and ‘isolation effect’.
Problem setting requires that the ‘context/environment effect’ is valued to become
a framing component. This affects the way an individual perceives baselines or bench-
marks to evaluate the performance of one’s choice. Loss aversion highlights how
motivation to avoid a loss is stronger than the motivation to make a gain. This reveals
why wta is generally higher than wtp. The same decision could generate opposite
choices if the outcomes are presented as losses rather than lost gains. Finally, indi-
viduals tend to isolate (discretize) consecutive probabilities rather than considering
them all together. Cpt proposes a value function in which the probabilities of possible
events are weighted with a weight (π) attributed by the individual. This function is
concave in the gain and convex in the loss region (where the slope is greater due
to loss aversion): gains and losses of the same absolute value could have different
effects on the final choice.
Different perspectives however come into play. They recognize the State as a
‘value-creating entity’ and not just as a ‘burden’ to the economy. The State creates
value (and demand) by investing in infrastructure, education, health, the environment
and basic research; helping banks when needed; purchasing more public debt secu-
rities than the private sector; financing innovation and so forth. Through the above
investments, the State also assumes significant risks and any ‘debt’ results from a
crisis and is not its cause. Polanyi goes further in considering that the State does not
distort the market, but creates it in a kind of filiation.18 In addition to P Leon’s remarks
on the role of the state and public administration (see ‘Ignorance of the dominant
powers’19 ), public interest theory can help with its regulatory requirements that serve
as guidelines and not as mere interference.

17 Tversky and Kahneman [39], pp. 297–323.

18 Polanyi [31].
19 http://www.iuav.it/Ateneo1/docenti/docenti201/Patassini-/materiali-/valutazione-come-filoso

fia-pratica-2020.pdf, pp. 17–19. See, in detail, Leon [19].

92 D. Patassini

5 Vicious Circle

According to public interest theory, regulation is an activity that generates net bene-
fits. For this reason, it is considered part of welfare economics, a background to
cost–benefit analysis (Cba) and its numerous variants. In other words, an evaluation
is performed on whether the costs of regulation are offset by any improvement in
social well-being. This assesses whether the improvement justifies the costs and it
is cost-effective. The main cost items include the design and implementation of the
regulation, its maintenance and ability to adapt to contextual changes. It goes without
saying that the concept of public interest, and the underlying theory, depend on how
(and by whom) the objectives of regulation are defined. This is a first short circuit.
But let us go further.
Some authors reflect on ‘public value’, on its semantic weakness and on ethical-
moral implications of liberal thought.20 Others, trying to recognize a pluralist collec-
tive nature of value creation shift their attention to stakeholders,21 to the relationship
among the environment, economy, society and institutions. Collective values tend
to be produced in social interaction and the interaction itself becomes a value, a
social capital. Evaluation therefore considers every decision as a contingent balance
of interests and compromises, and the market as a complex contractual domain in
which competitive advantages can accrue. But the value, created in a pluralistic,
collective and common way cannot be distributed in ways that are compatible with
market laws due to incompleteness and partial intentionality of social interactions.
This underlines a second short circuit.
In general, the difficulty of assessing genesis and components of value acknowl-
edges many degrees of freedom to distributional issues (equity) which the concept
of public does not envisage.

20 ON ‘public values’ see Bozeman [3]. The author exemplifies the difficulties of economic criteria to
adequately appreciate the values of social choice. And this with particular reference to privatization
policies of collective services or appropriation of common goods. Stiglitz [38] highlight that what
we measure affects what we do, and if our measurements are flawed, decisions can be biased.
Specifically, the three authors highlight the limits of GDP as an estimate of the effective production
capacity, wealth and well-being of a country and the effects that the reference to ‘public value’ may
have on it. A question then arises: what values should GDP represent, taking into account that it
can be considered in terms of production (goods and services), sum of income generated or demand
(goods and services consumed, including inventories)?.
21 Freeman el al. [8]. The text develops the studies of Freeman [9].
Values and Evaluation 93

6 Can There Be Evaluation Without Values?

Social interaction, even if unintended, is a value in itself, so the answer may be nega-
tive: there can be no evaluation without values or without interpreting domains of
validity. This is what relational economics argues, in referring for instance to anthro-
pological and ethnographic evidence. In this type of economy, interpersonal and inter-
community relations are more important factors than pure exchanges, becoming the
true framework for a real economy. The goal is to produce quality relations among
individuals, relations that are values in themselves. In addition to producing common
goods, relational economy can also be the basis of a collective intelligence within
a community and a source of surplus value. Web society is a sui generis relational
economy, being forced within boundaries designed by platform strategies: we live
in a digital fence as platform urbanism highlights.
But the answer may also be negative for another reason as in practice every value
can fluctuate, be lost, dissipated or transformed into negative value. The effects
can affect social life as well as evaluation domains and their functions. When the
boundaries of such domains contract, the costs of access, selection and, therefore,
exclusion can significantly increase.
The answer may be drastically negative when the values in action are considered
subjective or standardized ‘evaluations’. This happens whenever values are imposed
through forms of more or less truthful tyranny or persuasion; by enforcing power
and marginalizing ‘other’ values, often transformable into negative values. Equity,
freedom or solidarity can be contrasted with efficiency and technical effectiveness:
‘to spend less you have to use these inputs’; ‘to reach this end you must use these
means’.22 Today, technical effectiveness has become a universal meta-criterion: ‘to
achieve that goal, these are the procedures, and as individuals, living in an age of
technology, acting less like individuals and more like terminals of a system of rigid
prescriptions, the technique ends up introducing much more binding behaviour rules
than the prescriptions of old morals’.23

7 Hands off Values!

In the historical, cultural or contingent perspective, values are not metaphysical

entities, ‘but simple social coefficients that a society adopts to minimize its internal
conflict’24 and the risk of extinction. The term ‘coefficient’ embodies several factors.
The first, refers to the guiding principles or effects, depending on intentions, responsi-
bilities or performance. But sources, representations and geographies are also impor-
tant factors, becoming ratios (in the sense of relationship) among different values or

22 Galimberti [11], p. 261 (our translation).

23 Ivi, p. 262 (our translation).
24 Galimberti [12], p. 174 (our translation).
94 D. Patassini

classes of value. All these factors operate with physical-digital gradients that rely on
speed of social interactions.
While representing conflict, these coefficients are not readily usable in evaluation
practices (for example as value systems in evaluation functions) since they require
interpreting how they are generated and adopted.25 Today’s digital ecosystem is
significantly changing nature, forms of conflicts and society itself. New physical-
digital centralities go hand in hand with novel forms of emptiness, giving rise to a
‘friend-enemy’ polarity. Individual and collective dissociation phenomena are wors-
ening: once classified as pathological conditions, nowadays they are approached as
normality. This schizophrenia favours moral disengagement, an upheaval in the scale
of values and a loss of acceptable forms of dialogue. And whenever arguments are
no longer plausible, manipulation is effortlessly imposed: ignorance is affirmed as
a value and culture (no matter how it is conceived) reduced to disvalue. In similar
conditions, the assumptions of any evaluative exercise fail: whether following an
evidence-based (EV) or practice-based (PV) perspective.26
But let us take a step back, trying to resume the discourse sketched on the ‘theory
of values’ in social sciences. At the end of the concise text on values and evaluation
in social research, House and Howe offer a possible answer to the questions ‘can
evaluation ignore values?’ and ‘can the evaluation comparison be limited to perfor-
mance?’. They argue that ‘evaluation is as good or bad as the value framework that

25 For example, the exchange values, use and non-use values can be transformed into ‘coefficients’.
If the former might be proxies of terms of trade, the latter and the third refer to other factors. Use
values derive from the possibility of benefiting from an asset. They can be direct, extractive (use
of raw materials) and non-extractive (landscape, cultural heritage, etc.). Use values are considered
indirect when the interaction with the asset is not voluntary. Use can be current if observable,
optional if it gives a chance of using assets at another time or place; quasi-optional, to avoid losing
the possibility of using an asset in the future, even if there is no certainty to do it. We are dealing with
non-use (passive) values whenever willing to give up an asset to preserve it regardless of likelihood
of using it (value of existence): as long as future generations use it (bequest value), along with other
subjects or communities (value of vicar). This taxonomy is used when estimating the so-called ‘total
economic value’ following holistic approaches.
26 AS Sen [36] reminds us, evaluation can be understood as a ‘conflict among competing priorities’

in a plurality of value domains. Conflict is here considered in a broad sense, up to and including
competitive spirit: a clash among opponents, players and not necessarily enemies. Even if evaluation
suggests comparative reflection (a kind of pause or waiting), conflict can grow or decrease in
intensity. Evaluation practice can settle to map a conflict. Evidence-based approaches (EV) are
rather efficient in mapping tests. But, whenever a conflict is not only represented, but interpreted
and lived as experience, we enter what a certain practical philosophy defines as a hermeneutic
approach, a ‘practice-oriented approach’ or ‘practice-based’ (PV): a process of adaptation, rather
than knowledge and truthfulness,a peculiar way of ‘inhabiting’ the conflict. PV is not limited to
consider the conflict as a fate of interaction, but as language game (verbal or somatic, direct or
allusive) which has always something to say, which invites to listen and look, alerts and informs.
While in EV the evaluator maps and works on the conflict, ‘sure’ of his own scientific and rational
tools, in PV he is himself involved as an interpreter in the process that feeds (him): he shares the
event, being in its history and in its languages. He is in-between. With his interpretation, he can lead,
simplify or complicate it. I owe this distinction between EV and PV to T A Schwandt to whom I
dedicate few years ago a sort of double review, see http://www.iuav.it/Ateneo1/docenti/docenti201/
Patassini-/materiali-/dialogo-con-TA-Schwandt.pdf.
Values and Evaluation 95

constrains it’.27 Evaluation practice, as a tool for interaction and social research,
should belong to a value framework that legitimizes it, highlighting its rationale and
contents. If it weren’t, it would not make sense. The value framework is obviously
not given, but is built on a stratified device that is made up of history and the present,
of contingencies and principles. All three dimensions, the transcendental, historical-
cultural and contingent are logically conjured up. The plausibility of the construct can
be appreciated in political, moral and operational terms on the basis of their contri-
bution in developing forms of coexistence. In general, it is an opportunity to focus
on the values that characterize us as human beings and Nature, and on the respect
for people and their dignity. In practice, it entails recognizing to what extent shared
values or reasons for conflict can contribute to the development of an ecosystem, of
a oικείoς as Theophrastus would say (today taken up by Moore28 ), within scenarios
of sustainability and justice. Such a contribution is worth judging.

8 Value Judgments

In theories and philosophies of value, one wonders where values come from; how
and when does the concept of value blossom. In other words: ‘what it means to have
value’, ‘what is good’, ‘what good means’, ‘how to describe a set of good things’ for
a community, a society, an economic system and so forth. But we could also ques-
tion whether evaluation should/can formulate value judgments; if it is a subjective or
objective issue, a mere expression of personal preferences or is it rationally defen-
sible. And, finally, who is or should be responsible for the judgment: the subjects
involved or even the evaluators in their alleged ‘autonomy’ or questionable partic-
ipation. In countless circumstances asking these questions is already a worthwhile
exercise.
In evaluation practices value judgment, often recognized as a summative action,
represents more of a possibility than the main purpose. This is partly due to the histor-
ical discussion on factual and value judgments and, in particular, to the controversy
over the latter.29 In social sciences, the hypothesis of neutrality or non-evaluability of
science has prevailed for a few decades. In a positive perspective, science can eval-
uate, but not be evaluated except by ‘irrationality’. The hypothesis has however been
debunked by the impossibility of ‘universal’ or ‘atemporal validity’, even within
small communities or homogeneous cultural contexts, since values can only arise
from the history to which science itself belongs. Science can therefore be evaluated
on the basis of ‘bounded rationality’.

27 House [16], p. 137.

28 Moore [25].
29 The main acknowledged champions of the controversy were Weber, Sombart and Schmoller.
96 D. Patassini

Embodying these features, value is in constant tension with the concept of ‘norm’,
becoming a morally, rationally or aesthetically justifiable preference.30 The norma-
tive dimension enables an analytical distinction between ‘value judgment’ and ‘judg-
ment of fact’ where, unlike the former, the latter merely recognizes a situation or
event as real or preferable without any evaluation effort.
But if evaluation is an aide to formulate value judgments, whose prerogative is
it? Many believe that the EV approach needs to be limited to a description and
explanation. In case of an urban mobility plan (X), the features of X (related to
the design, implementation and management) and the relationships between X and
expected outcomes (W, Z) deserve attention, together with the factors or mechanisms
(B, C) that affect such relation. Whether X efficiently achieves results can be assessed,
for example on the basis of net costs or benefits. Hence, a realist-like judgment could
follow: ‘taking into account conditions B and C, X generates the outcomes W and Z
at a certain level of efficiency and/or effectiveness’.
Judgment, for evaluation purposes, must refer to a comparative proposition31 and
can emerge within the ‘polarity’ (true–false) and in its many shades. But, if in EV the
proposition may be a ‘place of truth’, in PV it cannot be so: here, the truth is a ‘place
of proposition’.32 The comparison to benchmarks, baselines or thresholds is made
by observing action (project) and its features. This judgment merely identifies the
instrumental value of X, i.e. its effectiveness and/or efficiency in achieving expected
results. This line of reasoning is considered by some as incomplete, or even lacking
evaluative dignity, being limited to utility, efficiency and effectiveness of the program.
In fact, the following questions may arise: are we sure that the program is plausible,
that its objectives are correct in relation to the context, to its social and eco-systemic
issues? If we limit ourselves to evaluating the achievement of stated objectives,
we assume that the program is plausible and that its objectives are correct. This
basically implies giving up any evaluation. But different judgments could be made
on the program’s plausibility and on its social and environmental relevance. This
leads to the next question: ‘whose opinion?’.
‘Subjectivists’, for example, may react by highlighting that judgments reflect
frames, preferences, emotions or attitudes of those involved in the program, plan or
project.33 But judgments should be distinguished from descriptions and explanations

30 Hirschman offers an interesting comment on the Latin saying de gustibus non (est) disputandum.
There is no question about tastes, they are just tastes. But if one begins to discuss them, they ipso
facto cease to be tastes to become values, see Hirschman [15].
31 The evaluative proposition belongs to the extended class of linguistic propositions. In common

language, the use of the word ‘proposition’ is often combined with the use of the term ‘true’ or
‘likely’. It is true that? Can a given effect be considered likely or justifiable? Plausible answers can be
obtained if there is agreement in definitions, contents and judgments. A proposition is understood if
language is clear and a technique mastered. Propositions can take the form of statements, questions,
orders, hypotheses, and alike.
32 Vattimo and Zabala [40], p. 32 (on Heidegger).
33 The frame concept is explicitly introduced by the prospect theory of Kahneman and Tversky in

1979 as a descriptive alternative to the theory of expected utility of von Neumann and Morgenstern.
It should be noted that Morgenstern had enriched the utility theory by using game theory with
Values and Evaluation 97

based on rationally tractable facts and therefore judged as true or false. For subjec-
tivists, the usefulness of a program, in terms of effectiveness and efficiency, is the only
judgment that matters. Any other value judgment only expresses an ‘emotional state’,
intractable by rational means. ‘Objectivists’ contest this position because evaluation
hardly ever deals with objective facts or purely subjective preferences. In general,
statements are simultaneously descriptive and evaluative, and descriptive ones are
only apparently so because they often contain value judgments. The latter may be
justified and defensible, allowing truth and objectivity to be recognized, but it can
also include disagreement of various sorts.
What emerges above all is the evaluator’s role that is, the moral responsibilities in
judging. Some believe that the evaluator should solely highlight the emerging ‘value
positions’ and leave decisions to the stakeholders. The evaluator should limit himself
to saying ‘if your value is A, expect Z’, thus enriching, rejecting or confirming the
available “theories of change”. This reflects the position of subjectivists and those
who consider evaluative action a scientific practice.
A different school of thought, that includes those who share an objective approach
to values, argues that the evaluator must analyse and synthesize different sources
of value, even if the synthesis is incomplete and sometimes divergent. Evalua-
tion thus becomes an intentional, inclusive and value-driven process,34 a dialogical
opportunity.
To develop a synthetic (aggregate) argumentative scheme, one can resort to infer-
ence and different types of weighting of criteria, game matrices, heuristic procedures
or non-deductive reasoning.35
Different types of synthesis can enrich ‘value perspectives’ by expanding rather
than squeezing the judgment domain. This not only depends on the argumentative
logic, but also on its ‘style’. The style can be ironic, biting, mocking or satirical and
at the same time cutting, pedantic, aggressive, offensive, and even violent. An ironic
style, not limited to concealing ignorance or mockery, can be a mark of intelligence
in recognizing meanings and values. It requires a good-natured attitude and amused
detachment from things, as well as a self-irony that is synonymous with seriousness,
severity and the ability to interpret the ‘irony of fate’ often trivialized (reduced to)
the unpredictability of events [1].

significant effects on the construction of the economic functions of supply and demand. Kahneman
and Tversky’s formulations are based on empirical evidence produced with cognitive psychology
experiments.
34 Davidson suggests ‘evaluation rubrics’ to make values explicit and aggregate them into perfor-

mative evidence. A rubric, called ‘global assessment scale’, proposes a set of criteria (with reference
standards or thresholds) and related performances. Each performance is described by a profile and
graded on an ordinal scale (for example, from insufficient to excellent, or from extremely risky to
extremely safe, etc.). A single rubric can be design for all performances or different rubrics for each
performance and related modalities. Worth saying that the problem of both metric and semantic
aggregation to formulate a synthetic judgment is unsolved. However, rubrics are widely used for
participatory evaluations or cross-program evaluations, see Davidson et al. [6].
35 SEE term ‘Values’ edited by Schwandt [33], pp. 443–444. The term explanation is inspired by

Schwandt [34]. See also House and Howe [16].

98 D. Patassini

In summary, the processes of making value judgments are as important, if not

more, than their objective or subjective synthesis. It is during such process that a
distinction between EV and PV matures. From an EV perspective, evaluative judg-
ment is expressed by integrating the positive dimension to the normative one. This
is a partial answer to the question ‘how to express an evaluation judgment’ as it is
limited to EV.
A distinction between normative and positive is subtle. In the scientific field,
‘positive’ is defined as an approach that intends to assess phenomena as they arise,
formulating theories based on empirical evidence or generating evidence based on
theories. On the contrary, an approach aimed at identifying ‘expected states’ or
circumstances, the factors, tools and means needed to achieve them is ‘normative’.
While the positive approach uses descriptive variables, the regulatory approach uses
target variables and analyses how their changes do affect reality based on prede-
fined objectives. Variables can be transformed into criteria. The second approach
seems more oriented to generating options and their ontological features. It therefore
requires value judgments.
Shadish, Cook and Leviton take a different stance in the seminal [37] text Foun-
dations of Program Evaluation. They reaffirm a distinction between descriptive eval-
uation, which merely recognizes the values of stakeholders, and prescriptive evalu-
ation, where evaluators have their own position in relation to values and their own
views on justice. The three authors provide a ‘practical’ rather than epistemolog-
ical explanation. Since disagreement on values is widespread, recurrent, inevitable,
and its phenomenology is unpredictable, it would not be ‘practical’ for evaluators
to make value judgments. Convinced that there are ways to describe things without
having to prescribe them, they implicitly accept such dichotomy, failing to avoid
the epistemological leap. Distinction between descriptive and prescriptive tends to
be weakened by the interactive, communicative and linguistic context in which it
occurs. PV practices strongly push in this direction.
The role of pragmatists certainly does not lead to a mediation since, for them,
explanations of reality originate from gradients of meaning. But if there is no evalu-
ation without value judgments (as a process or as expected outcomes), legitimation
issues still arise. For Scriven [35], value judgment is based on comparisons and
evidence about the quality and effectiveness of what is evaluated. Since some of the
evidences derives from modus operandi or quasi-circumstantial features of causal
chains, the evaluator’s task is to hypothesize and test causal connections and elimi-
nate any competitor source of bias. We once again return to an evaluator figure that
engages in the construction of theories. The task is very selective and delicate as the
evaluator assumes responsibility (moral, but also aesthetic) for the ‘associations’ he
identifies. Furthermore, he evaluates relevant questions and criticalities, regardless
of program objectives (goal-free) and the way it works (or does not work). Sharing
responsibility does not, however, change the ‘evaluation logic’ proposed by Scriven,
making it more sensitive to social interaction.
Values and Evaluation 99

9 Action-Oriented Evaluation

If evaluation is considered as a ‘conflict among competing options’ where it is

unlikely to evaluate without values, the evaluator’s position can only be in-between
and action-oriented. If this were not the case, the utility of the evaluation exercise
(one of the four classes of so called standard) would be lost, as Patton [27] would say.
This can happen with EV when critical, transformative or developmental procedures
are adopted, but it happens ‘naturally’ in PV.
Several approaches and modalities can make evaluation action-oriented. The most
radical is critical theory evaluation whose key words are disclosure, denunciation,
search for transparency. It embodies transformative energy and is therefore connected
to the well-known transformative evaluation.36 The main purpose of the latter is to
highlight how different types of rhetoric or narrative affect the values of action.
Transformative evaluation help to ‘unveil’ power relations and the ways in which
they use (abuse) language in describing what is being evaluated and the evaluative
action itself. Different types of evaluation are based on critical theory: the indigenous
or feminist perspective, the democratic-deliberative or emancipatory one, the one that
tackles issues of inequality and sustainability.37 In all these cases, attributing value
to certain perspectives is no obstacle to mediation and negotiation, but a sign of
responsibility and emancipation from dominant narratives. The evaluator is at the
same time an educator and an agent of transformation that facilitates a deliberative,
anti-rhetorical process of public criticism who contributes to the construction of a
‘narrative community’. This approach recalls selective principles,38 inspires forms
of advocacy evaluation in support of self-defence actions.
Other approaches are oriented towards understanding and resolving conflicts or
wicked problems. Action evaluation,39 for example, focuses on ‘the efficacy of
conflict-resolution interventions, particularly intractable conflicts’. Rothman asks
‘Does conflict resolution really work? How can we know? What does ‘work’ mean,
who defines it, and how?’ And most important, ‘How can our search for answers
about success increase our chances of achieving it?’.
Some forms of collaborative assessment are also oriented towards conflict resolu-
tion. This type of practices set aside the adversarial demands, typical of adversarial
evaluation and, to a certain extent, those of advocacy evaluation. It tries to avoid

36 See Mertens [23].

37 Patton [30]. Four principles define the critical foundations of a connected discourse: global
thinking, Anthropocene as a context, transformative engagement and integration.
38 Patton [29]. The principle- focused evaluation (P-FE) assesses whether actions comply with

basic principles and if, on this basis, the expected results are achieved. The principles refer to
value systems and function as a ‘rudder’ in conditions of uncertainty, turbulence or in complex
environments. Patton provides a frame (called GUIDE, a sort of rubric) to recognize whether the
principles provide useful guidance (G), whether they are useful (U), enlightening or stimulating (I),
developmentally adaptable (D) and evaluable (E).
39 Rothman [32].
100 D. Patassini

conflict and the opposition of pre-defined or presumed interests, suggesting alterna-

tive dispute resolution.40 By undermining the criterion as an instrument of judgment,
it contributes to creating a dialogic domain that does not limit itself to comparing
alternatives but, whenever possible, tries to create new options. In this respect, it
follows in the footsteps of illuminative evaluation,41 as expansion of the possible
Such an approach may qualify pluralistic evaluation which, in the event of a conflict,
often leads to a deadlock.
Less strategic approaches, but equally action-oriented, can contribute to creating
evaluative environments. This happens when responsive, inclusive and, in general,
participatory models are adopted to design the entire evaluation cycle and not only
some of its aspects. Developmental evaluation (DE) can be included in this class.42
DE is a real-time evaluation approach to support social innovation in core-free and
not centrally manageable environments. As its name illustrates, its evaluation is
sensitive to the organizational context, it is interactive and iterative with feedback
that generate actions and continuous development loops. The program or project staff
play a pivotal role to enable these actions. With its ability to structure operational
concepts and iterate rapid tests, DE is useful in innovative programs, for program
redefinition, to find solutions to complex problems and surpass deadlocks or crises.
The constructivist, or fourth generation,43 approach assumes action as an integral
part of the process, both at the interpretative and transformative level. For this reason,
it can be recognized contiguous to evaluation as a hermeneutic practice.
Many evaluation exercises fail or are of little use when they are excessively (if not
exclusively) concerned with consequences,44 epistemological outcomes, procedural
logics, or when overly confident in theories of action and change. They forget that
evaluation is, above all, an “art of navigation”, a search that cannot, by its very nature,
guarantee an optimal landing. It is worth noting that even minor technical fine tuning,
in constructing or finding a solution to evaluation functions, can make an evaluation
action-oriented: in primis, the disaggregation of functions and explicit weighting of
criteria associated with value systems.

References

1. Bateson G (1952) The position of humor in human communication. Macy Conferences

2. Batty M (2013) The new science of cities. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma
3. Bozeman B (2007) Public values and Public Interest: counterbalancing Economic Individu-
alism. Georgetown University Press, Washington

40 Since the late 1990s, collaborative law has worked in this direction with the seminal work of the
lawyer Webb in the USA and the publication of Cameron [5].
41 See illuminative evaluation in http://www.iuav.it/Ateneo1/docenti/docenti201/ Patassini-/

materiali-/rassegna-approcci-e-metodi-2020.pdf.
42 Patton [28].
43 Guba and Lincoln [13].
44 In this case, evaluation is conceived as a ‘science of consequences’.
Values and Evaluation 101

4. Buchanan JM, Tullock G (1962) The calculus of consent: logical foundations of constitutional
democracy. University of Michigan
5. Cameron NJ (2004) Collaborative process: deepening the dialogue. British Columbia Contin-
uing Legal Educ
6. Davidson J, Wehipeihana N, McKegg K (2011) The rubric revolution, Paper presented at
Australian evaluation society conference
7. Dewey J (1939) Theory of valuation. University of Chicago Press
8. Freeman RE el al. (2010) Stakeholder theory. The State of the Art, University Press, Cambridge
9. Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Cambridge University
Press
10. Galantino N (2020) ‘Tutto il senso delle azioni. Abitare le parole/valore’, Il sole 24 ore
Domenica, 15 novembre 2020.ne
11. Galimberti U (2009) Idee: il catalogo è questo. Feltrinelli, Milano
12. Galimberti U (2017) ‘I giovani del nichilismo attivo’, D la Repubblica, 9/12/2017, p 174
13. Guba E, Lincoln Y (1989) Fourth generation evaluation. Sage, Newbury Park, CA
14. Hess C, Ostrom E (2005) A framework for analysing the knowledge commons: a chapter from
understanding knowledge as a commons: from theory to practice. Library and Librarians’
Publication, Paper, p 21
15. Hirschman AO (1985) Against parsimony. Econ Philos I:7–21
16. House ER, Howe KR (1999) Values and evaluation in social research. Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, Ca
17. Kluckhohn C (1956) Toward a comparison of value-emphases in different cultures. In: White
LD i, Chicago Press, pp 116–132
18. Kluckhohn FR, Strodtbeck FL (1961) Variations in value orientations, Evanston, Ill.
19. Leon P (2016) I poteri ignoranti. Ascesa e caduta dell’economia dell’accumulazione,
Castelvecchi, Roma
20. Lichfield N (2005) Community impact evaluation: principles and practice. Routledge
21. Mazzucato M (2018) The value of everything. making and taking in the global economy.
Penguin Books—Random House, United Kindom
22. McDonald KI (2000) Use and valuation: information in the city. Urban Studies 37(10):1881–
1892
23. Mertens DM (2009) Transformative research and evaluation. The Guilford Press, London
24. Miller D, Patassini D (ed) (2005) Beyond benefit-cost analysis: accounting for non-market
values in planning evaluation. VT:Ashgate, Burlington
25. Moore JW (2017) Value in the web of life, or, why world history matters to geography. Dialogues
Human Geogr 7(3):326–330
26. Moroni S (1994) Planning, assessment and utilitarianism. notes on Nathaniel Lichfield’s
contribution to the evaluation field. Planning Theory, 12
27. Patton MQ (2008) Utilization-focused evaluation. Sage Publications
28. Patton MQ (2010) Developmental evaluation: applying complexity concepts to enhance
innovation and use. Guilford Press, New York
29. Patton MQ (2018) Principles-focused evaluation—the GUIDE. Guilford Press, New York
30. Patton MQ (2020) Blue marble evaluation: premises and principles. Guilford Publications
31. Polanyi K (2010) The Great transformation. The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time,
Beacon Press, Boston (ed. or. 1944, Farrar & Rinehart, New York)
32. Rothman J (2003) Action evaluation. In: Burgess G, Burgess H (eds) Beyond intractability,
conflict information consortium. University of Colorado, Boulder
33. Schwandt TA (2005) Values. In: Encyclopaedia of evaluation (S Mathison ed.), Sage
Publications, pp 443–444
34. Schwandt TA (1997) The landscape of values in evaluation: charted terrain and unexplored
territory. In: Rog DJ, Fournier D (eds), Progress and future directions in evaluation: perspectives
on theory, practice, and methods. New Directions for Evaluation, 76, pp11–23
35. Scriven M (1991) Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.), Sage Publications
36. Sen A (2009) The idea of justice. Allen Lane & Harvard University
102 D. Patassini

37. Shadish WR, Cook TD, Leviton LC (1991) Foundations of program evaluation. Sage
Publications, Theories of practice
38. Stiglitz JE, Sen A, Fitoussi JP (2010) Mismeasuring our lives: why GDP doesn’t add up. The
New York Press, NY
39. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of
uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5(4):297–323
40. Vattimo G, Zabala S (2011) Hermeneutic communism. Columbia University Press, NY
41. Veca S (2018) L’idea di incompletezza. Quattro lezioni, Giangiacomo Feltrinelli Editore,
Milano
42. Wilde O (1890) The picture of dorian Gray. Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine, London
Valuation and Values: Earth and the Cities
The Value Creation in Our “Regime
D’historicité”

Giulia Sonetti and Patrizia Lombardi

Abstract The contemporary world grapples with an array of crises encompassing

climate upheaval, global pandemics, ecological degradation, species loss, and deep-
seated inequality. The intricate interconnections among these challenges align with
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Overcoming these crises demands
sweeping transformations affecting economies, institutions, values, beliefs, and
worldviews, shaping our relationship with the environment. The ‘Green Deal’ under-
scores the significance of radical value realignment and introduces a European
sustainability competence framework to drive ecological learning within the EU.
This article elucidates how the appraisal discipline can ignite fresh values, mind-
sets, and conduct, steering us towards a sustainable future. Through the prism of
the value creation process and our historical context, we explore the potential of
adopting a historical perspective, as conceptualized by Hartog, which encompasses
society’s treatment and dialogue about its past. By embracing this vantage point,
intertwined with the realms of science history, psychology, anthropology, and trans-
disciplinary mode-2 science, emerges the potential for a novel epistemology for
prevailing sustainability narratives. This article posits that the appraisal discipline
holds the potential to contribute to shaping this evolving epistemological landscape.

Keywords Decision-making · Sustainability values · Transformative change ·

Complex appraisal · Sustainability transitions

G. Sonetti (B)
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - Barcelona Tech, Research Institute for Sustainability
Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Lombardi
Interuniversity Department of Regional & Urban Studies and Planning, Politechnic of Turin and
University of Turin, Viale Mattioli 39, 10125 Turin, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 105
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_8
106 G. Sonetti and P. Lombardi

1 A Call for a Radical Shift

The 2030 UN Agenda for Sustainable Development [32] urges transformative recon-
sideration of our present societal model, echoing an intensifying discourse across
science, policy, and practice about the imperative for systemic shifts. Designed as a
blueprint for people, the planet, and prosperity, it acknowledges the intricate inter-
play between economic, social, and environmental progress, underscoring that the
triumph of any one facet hinges on the well-being of the others. Sustainability-driven
transformations claim a prime spot on global agendas, marked by the radical socio-
cultural, political, economic, and technological transformations required to propel
societies toward more promising futures in the Anthropocene [31].
The 2021 Dasgupta Review affirmed that the welfare of each individual—our
livelihoods and economies—rests upon the natural environment [10]. It serves as a
reminder that humanity is deeply intertwined with nature—a reality often neglected
amidst our technological self-assuredness—and that our economies are intricately
embedded within the natural world. Nevertheless, our current trajectory of devel-
opment is glaringly unsustainable, imperiling the prosperity of both present and
future generations. The ‘Horizon Europe Climate Mission’ and the ‘Intergovern-
mental Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services’ urge science’s role
in catalyzing a comprehensive transformation of the Humans-Nature Relationship
(HNR) [19, 25].
We necessitate transformations spanning economic and financial systems, institu-
tions, developmental metrics, education, and our perception of our place within the
wider planet [36]. This sort of transformative change is a necessity and an attainable
goal, but it hinges on knowledge and alternative visions of viable pathways.
In recent years, evaluation has emerged as an increasingly pivotal tool for assessing
the value of sustainable development interventions in terms of relevance, impact,
performance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability [33]. Its reach extends
across public and private organizations. Governments, especially in education, health,
and social services, employ evaluation to shape their strategies for tackling the chal-
lenges within their purview. Private entities continually appraise their performance,
regardless of whether they explicitly use the term “evaluation.” Most foundations
have embraced regular evaluation, not only of their beneficiaries but also of the
overarching direction of their funding initiatives [33].
Evaluation has formalized its role within most development agencies, both multi-
lateral and bilateral. Despite notable strides, there remain areas where evaluation lags
behind. Some evaluative practices remain mechanistic and introspective, addressing
minutiae rather than engaging with the broader landscape of a swiftly changing
world. Evaluation must adapt to meet the demands of sustainable development and
actively contribute to transformative change.
This essay delineates the context wherein the evaluation and appraisal discipline
hold the potential to incite fresh values, mindsets, and behaviors, steering us toward
an inclusive sustainable future. Our exploration is filtered through the lenses of the
value creation process and our current historical context. By “historicity,” as Hartog
The Value Creation in Our “Regime D’historicité” 107

puts it [14], we encapsulate not only “the manner in which a society regards and
discusses its past” but also “the modes of self-awareness within a human community.”
We posit that embracing this newfound perspective to scrutinize value creation,
situated at the juncture of science history, psychology, anthropology, and the broad
domain of transdisciplinary mode-2 science, has the potential to yield an invigorated
epistemology for prevailing narratives about sustainability transition—an endeavor
wherein the appraisal discipline could (and should) offer guidance.

2 The Sustainability Value Within the Appraisal Discipline

In 2018, a pivotal moment emerged at the annual seminar of SIEV - the Italian Real
Estate Appraisal and Investment Decision Society. Titled “Integrated Evaluation for
the Management of Contemporary Cities,” the seminar signaled a clarion call for a
paradigm shift in the discipline’s approach to value creation [22]. Within this context,
the appraisal discipline holds profound potential in spearheading the sought-after
transformations, offering operational insights to transform evaluation activities into
robust supports for more sustainable policymaking [25].
Recent evolutionary shifts within the appraisal discipline have predominantly
revolved around intervention “projects,” viewed as pivotal transitional phases char-
acterized by “decisive and well-defined transformation, facilitated by a sequence of
interconnected, interdependent, and consequential actions” [9]. Research into these
human-environmental transformations has aimed to shape a more sustainable future
for all. Yet, the implicit normative essence of “sustainability” remained a nebulous
terrain [29].
Narratives play a pivotal role within Sustainability Assessments (SA), even when
they are not overtly articulated. Concurrently, worldviews, values, and imaginaries
subtly shape individual and societal sustainability narratives—deliberately or uncon-
sciously—particularly when seeking solutions for intricate challenges and scruti-
nizing various option spaces [28]. For instance, within prevailing SA terminologies,
the concepts of sustainable development or growth are never juxtaposed as contra-
dictions. Even integrated assessments fostered by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) fail to explore scenarios involving the cessation of economic
growth, globally or in affluent nations, deeming sufficiency or degrowth strategies
implausible [28]. The sacrosanct notion of boundless economic growth remains
largely unexamined, while scientists may question methodological approaches and
calculated quantities, achieving a ‘critically objective evaluation’ seems elusive [4].
The proliferation of these “unquestioned” audit cultures is frequently interpreted
as a shift from regimes of trust—often tied to professional practice’s legitimacy [8]—
to regimes of accountability [15, 16]. However, viewed through Foucault’s lens of
neoliberal statecraft, this “accountability rhetoric conceals the true imperative for the
state to justify itself to the market, effectively emulating market dynamics” [8].
In this landscape characterized by the absence of empirical evidence, suitable
knowledge, unbiased research, and applicable assessment tools for sustainability,
108 G. Sonetti and P. Lombardi

valuers find their ability to offer informed market value opinions for existing and
sustainable assets in jeopardy. Recent research has chastised valuers for their hesi-
tance and laid blame for their inability to furnish financial justifications for investing
in sustainable commercial real estate [34]. Valuers occupy a pivotal role within the
commercial real estate realm, serving as critics and impartial assessors of asset market
values. Thus, their treatment of sustainability within valuation practice holds impli-
cations for the real estate sector and broader financial markets with vested interests in
real estate. A wealth of research delves into the sustainability-market value interplay;
however, the interpretation and application of this research in the valuation sphere
remain limited. The positivist orientation and constrained critical analysis of the
sustainability-market value nexus have left the valuation profession grappling with
uncertainties regarding clarity, reliability, and validity of presented information.
Amidst these challenges imposed by our “regime d’historicité” and concurrent
crises, we discern substantial potential residing within the evaluation and appraisal
disciplines. The distinctive facet setting evaluation apart from akin disciplines—like
monitoring and performance audit—is its reluctance to take the status quo at face
value. These counterparts are compliance-focused, tasked with verifying whether
projects and programs adhere to their intended objectives. While both audit and evalu-
ation oversee organizational activities, their paradigms and methodologies markedly
diverge. Evaluation takes a broader stance, empowered to transcend internal inter-
vention logic. It delves into how an intervention aligns with the broader landscape,
questioning its contribution to solving the designated problem [17, 23]. Evaluators
possess the capacity to scrutinize an intervention’s original logic and design against
performance and impact evidence, although this isn’t always the norm. Evaluators
and those commissioning evaluations often steer clear of challenging the foundational
assumptions underpinning their programs.

3 Transdisciplinarity for Holistic, Inclusive

and Participative Value Creation

The transformative potential of transdisciplinary (TD) aspects within sustainability

science is widely acknowledged [1, 30]. Yet, venturing into the realm of transdis-
ciplinarity, which extends its reach to social sciences and humanities, presents both
novel policy and practice landscapes [26]. Gaining legitimacy for TD approaches in
the appraisal discipline demands forging novel, enduring, participatory, and trans-
formative pathways. These avenues provide platforms to acknowledge and engage
with macro-ethical, adaptive, and cross-disciplinary challenges, even amplifying the
voices of the marginalized. Thus, evaluators must recognize and embrace alterna-
tive knowledge forms beyond linear and Western paradigms. This includes Eastern
knowledge production, indigenous wisdom, marginalized communities’ insights, and
the wisdom of the common citizen. Regrettably, the appraisal discipline, nestled
within academic departments, appears to lag behind these unfolding trends.
The Value Creation in Our “Regime D’historicité” 109

Especially in the European Union context, scholars contend that higher education
institution reform necessitates a critical reassessment of learning processes [5, 35].
Presently, such processes do not furnish ample opportunities for students to delve
into sustainable ways of existence, understanding, and engagement within socio-
ecological systems. A historical assertion emphasizes that disciplinary research and
teaching models contribute to excessive knowledge fragmentation [2, 3], breeding
disciplinary ‘silos’ that obstruct essential communication across both disciplinary
and organizational frontiers [24]. Numerous experts underline that academia’s disci-
plinary structure encompasses not only mastery of the scientific domain but also
ingrained habits and symbolic-cultural resources, pivotal in shaping communities’
pursuits and attributing significance to their endeavors. “Disciplines shape scientific
research by forming the primary institutional and cognitive units in academia […]
Members of a discipline communicate within their community, share basic assump-
tions and examples about meaningful problems, and set standards for reliable and
valid methods, as well as establish what is considered a good solution to a problem.”
[13: 27]. In this regard, the discipline of evaluation cannot disregard its inherent polit-
ical character. This raises essential questions about who holds the right to engage in
evaluation, who defines the foundational values and principles, and who can initiate
a design process acknowledging the inherent non-neutrality of technology and tools.
Indeed, prior to evaluating the impact of policies, products, or entities on sustain-
able development, it is imperative to uncover the narratives and values underpinning
a comprehensive Sustainability Assessment (SA) framework [27]. The concept of
wicked problems intrinsic to sustainability issues implies that problem definition is
subjective, stemming from the observer’s relationship with the world. Rather than
reconciling divergent perspectives on a problem, a TD strategy might seek ‘cogni-
tive shortcuts’ to frame and address the situation. It approaches wicked problems as
an epistemological challenge, as opposed to prior research that mainly responded
to management, governance, or decision-making quandaries posed by these issues
[6, 18, 21].
Unraveling the sustainability value within appraisal research is an intricate fusion
of three surplus values: energetic and non-entropic, genealogical-ecological, and
scientific-cultural [11, 20]. Such intricacy rests upon a fresh interpretative narrative,
cultivated through collaboration between natural sciences, humanities, and knowl-
edge co-production with external actors orbiting a particular reality. The emergence
of novel value categories—social use value and total economic value—responds
to the societal and disciplinary demand for expressing a multifaceted value that
transcends private use and exchange values, embracing a spectrum of dimensions
(ethical, aesthetic, economic, cultural, scientific, political, juridical, and equitable).
The confluence of environmental transformation and social development calls for a
reevaluation of economic exchange, moral principles, knowledge, and established
social interactions. In essence, it beckons a transdisciplinary approach to co-creating
values [23].
110 G. Sonetti and P. Lombardi

4 Toward a New Epistemology in Our Regime D’historicité

Supported In his insightful work [14], François Hartog—an esteemed historian of

antiquity with a keen contemporary focus—profoundly delves into societies’ interac-
tion with their history. He scrutinizes their methods of experiencing and representing
it, ultimately probing into the essence of their existence across time. At the core of
his exploration lies the notion of a “regime of historicity,” a concept meticulously
fashioned through the inspirations of Lévi-Strauss, Sahlins, Koselleck, Lenclud, and
a historical trajectory spanning two centuries of European culture, from Hegel to
Heidegger. Within the realm of this historicity regime, Hartog contends that we can
grasp its essence in two ways: narrowly, as the manner in which a society engages
with and narrates its past, expansively, encompassing a community’s self-awareness
dynamics. Serving as a tool for comparative historical analysis, the concept of a
regime of historicity proves pivotal in deciphering societies’ historical temporalities,
which, in turn, influence their value creation processes.
This perspective becomes our vantage point to delve into the creation of value,
inherently situated at the crossroads of the history of science, psychology, and anthro-
pology. Such an approach yields exhilarating outcomes, including the formulation
of a novel epistemology for present sustainability narratives [7]. The subsequent
reformation of values and evaluation criteria transcends the mere pursuit of not
compromising future generations, as implied by sustainability. Instead, it signals an
epistemological shift in how we perceive ourselves as human beings. Within today’s
global cultural context dominated by technological strides and business impera-
tives, a penchant for simplicity over complexity prevails—a paradigm synonymous
with shedding superfluous layers and second thoughts in favor of total performa-
tive efficiency. Yet, while this era of the eternal present dismantled intermediaries
and authorities, it didn’t always foster the open-mindedness it initially promised.
The digital culture, birthed to obliterate boundaries and tear down walls, paradox-
ically nurtured conservative, obscurantist, populist, and individualistic tendencies.
These reverberations are manifest not only in our digital realm but have perme-
ated modern political landscapes. Consequently, the political role of the appraisal
discipline needs a reflective overhaul, navigating uncertainties of the contempo-
rary climate to ensure the integrity of integrated sustainability assessments. Essen-
tial questions for evaluators include: to what extent does the chosen methodology
shape the analysis’s narrative? This work contends that these questions are inher-
ently intertwined. Echoing Thoreau’s proposition that we become tools of our tools,
language isn’t merely a communication conduit—it also steers the discourse. Hence,
in sustainability assessment, the alignment between arguments and methodologies
isn’t uncommon to discern.
Recent exploration into sustainability assessment methodologies has engendered
diverse approaches to value co-creation. These range from envisioning sustainable
transformation scenarios to transformative research—an endeavor entailing partic-
ipatory action research with stakeholders and civil society to both understand and
catalyze sustainable change [12]. Both approaches share the fundamental premise
The Value Creation in Our “Regime D’historicité” 111

that ecological transition inherently necessitates political transformation, and vice

versa. Nonetheless, the prevailing dualistic perspective stemming from conventional
Cartesian or Kantian lenses often restricts the interpretation of Nature—or the global
Earth system. This limited perspective is aligned with the traditional view of science
and technology as dominion over the material world. Consequently, the intricate
interplay between society and nature, now largely governed by technoscience within
a framework of capitalist relations underpinned by neoliberal logic, remains inad-
equately explored. This framework harnesses biophysical dynamics not solely for
control or coexistence but to effectively ‘ride’ them, underlining the complexities
inherent in our evolving relationship with nature.
The dimensions of the sustainability concept, layered with its narratives, repre-
sentations, and assessment methods, have revealed the ethnocentric nature of our
attempts to define and describe reality. Even within influential encyclicals, such as the
Pope’s recent proclamation, the deep material connection to Nature remains elusive.
Much like Saint Augustine’s concept of time, Nature’s essence remains universally
understood yet hard to encapsulate in precise terms, surrounded by cognitive uncer-
tainties and philosophical discourse. A chorus of scholars from various fields has
questioned the very construct of Nature, advocating for a “multinaturalism” that
transcends Western paradigms and embraces diverse ontologies.
This exploration also beckons us to scrutinize our implicit assumptions. Whether
as appraisal professors or practitioners, an introspective examination of our approach
is imperative. It nudges us to reconsider the fundamentals we may have taken for
granted, inviting us to chart a new trajectory.

5 Conclusions

The current polycrises and consequent call for transformation recognizes the urgency
to shift our economic, financial, institutional, educational, and perceptual paradigms
in order to address the challenges presented by the Anthropocene epoch. The Anthro-
pocene, characterized by human influence on the Earth’s ecosystems and geology,
requires us to fundamentally reconsider our behaviors, systems, and worldviews to
foster a thriving and sustainable future.
Woiwode [36] aptly underscores the critical nature of this transformation,
asserting that it encompasses domains as diverse as economics, finance, institu-
tions, developmental metrics, education, and our overall perception of humanity’s
role within the intricate web of planetary existence. This transformation is not
merely a theoretical ideal, it’s an imperative, and it demands a departure from
business-as-usual approaches.
Within this context, evaluation emerges as a powerful instrument poised to
contribute substantively to the facilitation of such transformational change. Evalua-
tion, as a discipline, is deeply rooted in systematic inquiry, analysis, and assessment.
It operates as a reflective process that seeks to comprehend the effectiveness, effi-
ciency, relevance, and impact of various initiatives, policies, and interventions. This
112 G. Sonetti and P. Lombardi

inherently empirical and analytical nature of evaluation aligns with the scientific
rigor required to drive transformative change.
Evaluation functions as a mechanism for knowledge generation and accumulation.
It can systematically gather data and evidence, scrutinize outcomes and impacts, and
discern patterns and trends. This accumulation of knowledge serves as a foundation
for fostering alternative visions and pathways toward a thriving Anthropocene. In
essence, evaluation provides the empirical grounding necessary for envisioning and
shaping transformative trajectories.
Moreover, evaluation’s emphasis on multidimensional assessment and systemic
thinking resonates strongly with the epistemological shift necessary for thriving in
the Anthropocene. As a professor in sustainability, leadership, and change manage-
ment, you’re acutely aware of the need to view complex systems holistically,
acknowledging their interdependencies, feedback loops, and emergent properties.
This systemic perspective aligns with evaluation’s mandate to consider both intended
and unintended consequences, as well as the broader ecological, social, and economic
implications of interventions.
The transformative potential of evaluation is enhanced by its capacity to engage
stakeholders and foster participatory processes. As you’ve expressed in your profile,
appropriate participation is a key tenet in navigating complex systems. Evaluation’s
engagement of diverse voices, including those of local communities, policymakers,
experts, and marginalized groups, amplifies the democratic and inclusive nature of
the transformational discourse. In this way, evaluation becomes a platform for co-
creating visions and strategies that resonate with the collective aspirations for a
thriving Anthropocene.
The intricacies revealed by the exploration of such transformative dimensions,
combined with the imperative to scrutinize implicit assumptions, form a rich back-
drop against which the potential of evaluation stands out prominently. The ethno-
centrism laid bare by the dimensions of sustainability underscores the importance of
adopting more inclusive and diverse ontological perspectives. The alignment between
the challenges of understanding Nature’s essence and the complexity inherent in
evaluation further solidifies the evaluation’s discipline’s capacity to contribute to
transformative change, urging us to:
• Probe the intricate ties between energy, work, and value within the capi-
talism/nature nexus, illuminating the dynamics of our current socio-ecological
configuration.
• Unearth the diminishing natural fertility of biophysical and socio-technical
systems, investigating its implications for economic processes.
• Challenge the separation between expectations and reality that underpins financial
crises, dissecting the uncertainty inherent in real economy sectors.
• Reframe language to expose the paradox of “sustainable growth.”
• Embrace practices that inherently challenge dominant paradigms, such as
reducing consumption and adopting an anti-utilitarian stance.
• Engage interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches to amplify marginal-
ized voices and topple dominative relations over both humanity and nature.
The Value Creation in Our “Regime D’historicité” 113

• Reevaluate social practices through an ontological re-composition of the social

and natural realms.
Sustainability science embodies the prospect of surpassing reductionist anal-
yses, embracing systemic designs that holistically map contemporary phenomena.
Through thinking skills and diverse perspectives, an inter/trans-disciplinary appraisal
may illuminate the shaping of values in the digital post-COVID world. Recognizing
that complex systems thrive on a multiplicity of legitimate perspectives, this endeavor
requires us to map out distinct contexts to grasp systemic phenomena.
Our community of evaluators spans diverse disciplines, from ecology to soci-
ology. Rather than seeking a singular theory of appraisal, we should embrace the
diversity of backgrounds, weaving together materials, methods, and case studies to
explore the interstitial spaces between different perspectives and concerns. These
lines encapsulate both epistemological and political tensions, representing opportu-
nities to embrace the complexity of evaluation as a generative perspective. Amidst
these tensions, lies the true value of research in urban appraisal under the veil of
global change and uncertainty. As we navigate this uncharted terrain, we stand at the
threshold of reshaping appraisal for sustainability, weaving a tapestry that celebrates
the myriad voices shaping our world.

References

1. Arrobbio O, Sonetti G (2021) Cinderella lost? Barriers to the integration of energy social
sciences and humanities outside academia. Energy Res Soc Sci 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
erss.2021.101929
2. Baptista BV, Klein JT (2022) Institutionalizing interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity:
collaboration across cultures and communities. Routledge
3. Bina O, Pereira L (2020) Transforming the role of universities: from being part of the problem
to becoming part of the solution. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 62:16–29
4. Bina O, Pereira L (2021) Possible beyond plausible: reimagining ourselves and our cities. Plan
Theory Pract 13–17
5. Bina O, Verdini G, Inch A, Varanda M, Guevara M, Chiles P (2017) INTREPID futures initia-
tive: universities and knowledge for sustainable urban futures: as if inter and transdisciplinarity
mattered. In: 4th INTREPID Rep.
6. Bonaccorsi A (2018) Towards an epistemic approach to evaluation in SSH. In: The evaluation
of research in social sciences and humanities. Springer, pp 1–29
7. Brandon PS, Lombardi P (2011) Evaluating sustainable development in the built environment.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
8. Burrows R (2012) Living with the H-index? Metric assemblages in the contemporary academy.
Sociol Rev 60:355–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02077.x
9. Capucci M (2018) For an ETHICS OF URBAN REGENEration BT - integrated evaluation for
the management of contemporary cities. In: Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M,
Stanghellini S (eds) Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 67–75
10. Dasgupta P (2021) The economics of biodiversity: the Dasgupta review. Hm Treasury
11. Ferrer-Balas D, Lozano R, Huisingh D, Buckland H, Ysern P, Zilahy G (2010) Going beyond
the rhetoric: system-wide changes in universities for sustainable societies. J Clean Prod 18:607–
610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.009
114 G. Sonetti and P. Lombardi

12. Giampietro M, Saltelli A (2014) Footprints to nowhere. Ecol Indic 46:610–621. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.01.030
13. Hadorn GH, Hoffmann-Riem H, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Joye D, Pohl C,
Wiesmann U, Zemp E (2008) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer
14. Hartog F (2015) Regimes of historicity: presentism and experiences of time. Columbia
University Press
15. Holmwood J (2011) The impact of ‘impact’ on UK social science. Methodol. Innov. Online
6:13–17
16. Holmwood J (2011) A manifesto for the public university. A&C Black
17. Kieliszewski CA, Maglio PP, Cefkin M (2012) On modeling value constellations to understand
complex service system interactions. Eur Manag J 30:438–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EMJ.
2012.05.003
18. Klein JT (2014) Discourses of transdisciplinarity: looking back to the future. Futures 63:68–74.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.08.008
19. Lotz-Sisitka H, Wals AEJ, Kronlid D, McGarry D (2015) Transformative, transgressive social
learning: rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic global dysfunction. Curr
Opin Environ Sustain 16:73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.018
20. Lozano R, Ceulemans K, Alonso-Almeida M, Huisingh D, Lozano FJ, Waas T, Lambrechts
W, Lukman R, Hugé J (2014) A review of commitment and implementation of sustainable
development in higher education: results from a worldwide survey. J Clean Prod 108:1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.048
21. Max-Neef MA (2005) Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecol Econ 53:5–16. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014
22. Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M, Stanghellini S (2018) Integrated evaluation
for the management of contemporary cities: results of SIEV 2016. Springer
23. Napoli G (2018) The complexity of value and the evaluation of complexity: social use value and
multi-criteria analysis BT - integrated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities.
In: Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M, Stanghellini S (eds) Springer International
Publishing, Cham, pp 187–198
24. Norton LS, Sonetti G, Sarrica M (2022) Crossing borders, building new ones, or shifting
boundaries? Shared narratives and individual paths towards inter/transdisciplinarity in research
centres for urban sustainability. Sustain Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01218-8
25. Pareglio S, Oppio A (2018) The value of our common environment BT - integrated evaluation
for the management of contemporary cities. In: Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero
M, Stanghellini S (eds) Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 503–509
26. Pohl C, Hadorn GH (2008) Methodological challenges of transdisciplinary research. Nat Sci
Soc 16:111–121
27. Sala S, Ciuffo B, Nijkamp P (2015) A systemic framework for sustainability assessment. Ecol
Econ 119:314–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.09.015
28. Saltelli A, Benini L, Funtowicz S, Giampietro M, Kaiser M, Reinert E, van der Sluijs JP
(2020) The technique is never neutral. How methodological choices condition the generation
of narratives for sustainability. Environ Sci Policy 106:87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.
2020.01.008
29. Schneidewind U, Singer-Brodowski M, Augenstein K, Stelzer F (2016) Pledge for a
transformative science: a conceptual framework. Wuppertal papers
30. Sonetti G, Arrobbio O, Lombardi P, Lami IM, Monaci S (2020) “Only social scientists laughed”:
reflections on social sciences and humanities integration in European energy projects. Energy
Res Soc Sci 61:101342. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ERSS.2019.101342
31. Steffen W, Persson A, Deutsch L, Zalasiewicz J, Williams M, Richardson K, Steffen W, Crumley
C, Crutzen P, Folke C, Gordon L, Molina M, Ramanathan V, Scheffer M, Schellnhuber HJ,
Svedin U (2011) The anthropocene: from global change to planetary stewardship. R Swedish
Acad Sci 739–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0185-x
32. UN (2015) The sustainable development agenda [WWW Document]
The Value Creation in Our “Regime D’historicité” 115

33. Uitto JI, Batra G (2022) Transformational change for people and the planet: evaluating
environment and development.
34. Warren-Myers G (2012) The value of sustainability in real estate: a review from a valuation
perspective. J Prop Invest Financ
35. von Wehrden H, Guimarães MH, Bina O, Varanda M, Lang DJ, John B, Gralla F, Alexander D,
Raines D, White A (2019) Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research: finding the common
ground of multi-faceted concepts. Sustain Sci 14:875–888
36. Woiwode C (2016) Off the beaten tracks: The neglected significance of interiority for sustain-
able urban development. Futures 84:82–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.10.002
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City
as a Functionings System

Maria Rosa Trovato

Abstract The complexity of the contemporary city from an economic, social,

cultural, natural, health, environmental point of view and regarding the effects
of climate change, poses a problem of urban quality of life for various reasons.
New interpretative models must be identified to overcome these new challenges.
Measuring the value of urban quality is equivalent to identifying the merit of the city
has in producing individual and social well-being. This issue has both conceptual and
operational implications. In the field of theoretical approaches to the study of quality
of life, the Sen’s capability approach has become relevant. The paper promotes an
axiology of the value of urban quality able to grasp the complexity that character-
izes living in the contemporary city. Based on the approach to capability, the city
can be interpreted as the set of functionings, the urban policies can be interpreted
as equipment to expand the capabilities of people living there. Based on capability
approach the urban quality can be interpreted as the urban quality of life, that is
as a measurement of the capabilities achieved by people who experience the city,
in the individual perspective as well-being achievement, in the social perspective
as agency achievement. In this regard, the paper proposes an interpretative model
and an operational approach aimed at measuring the urban quality of life, to support
decision-makers in the policies that encourage the achievement of the capabilities
by people who live in the city, producing individual and social well-being.

Keywords Urban quality of life · Capability approach · Well-being achievement ·

Agency achievement · Shape city in the space of functionings

1 Introduction

As an effect of the process of change that is affecting the contemporary city, in

economic, social, cultural, natural, health, and environmental terms in general, and
particularly with reference to the effects of climate change, it now appears more

M. R. Trovato (B)
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 117
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_9
118 M. R. Trovato

articulated in form and content with a varied spectrum of situations in which for
different reasons a problem of the quality of urban life arises.
The current debate on the city highlights the convergence of analysts and scholars
in deeming the traditional interpretive schemes inadequate.
A new form of the city could make it possible to overcome these new chal-
lenges and promote individual and social well-being. Urban quality is not the end
of the beautiful city, but the means of promoting the well-being of citizens and the
community.
Measuring the value of urban quality is equivalent to identifying its merit in
producing individual and social well-being. From this perspective there are many
implications, both conceptual and operational, for arriving at a measure of the value
of urban quality.
An “axiological” approach based on “authentic”, “intersubjective” and as such
“inemendable” values of urban quality can be identified based on a coordina-
tion between individual motivations and socio-systemic normativity [7, 24, 25].
Measuring the value of urban quality means identifying the merit that the shape
of the city takes within a multidimensional perspective of well-being and quality of
life.
In the context of theoretical approaches to the study of well-being and quality of
life from a multidimensional perspective, the theories developed by the Nobel Prize
in Economics, Amartya Sen, have assumed a significant weight.
The capability approach is an economic theory, which brings together a series
of ideas, concepts and methodological indications, formulated initially by Sen [18–
20, 22] and later by Martha Nussbaum [12–14]. She provides an alternative way
of conceptualizing human behaviour [26], broadening themes that have hitherto
been excluded from traditional approaches to the economy of well-being or poorly
formulated by them.
The main focus of the “Capability approach” is on people’s freedom. Such an
approach “… measures the individual’s advantage by reason of the person’s capability
to do those things to which, for one reason or another, he/she assigns a value. The
advantage of one individual in terms of opportunity is to be considered inferior to
that of another if that individual is given less capability - less effective opportunities
- to achieve what he or she values. In this perspective, the focus of the approach lies
in the actual freedom of people to do or be what they think is worth doing or being”
[23].
Sen proposes, therefore, an idea of “being well” (well-being) understood as “what
the individual can do or can be” (together of being and doing), in relation to the capa-
bility of people to transform the means and resources available in results, achieve-
ments and goals. A proposal that aims at overcoming the conception of material
well-being limited to the availability of resources only.
The city, in fact, using the conceptual categories introduced by Sen, could be
interpreted as the set of fuctionings involving people living there. People use the urban
material and immaterial equipment combining it with personal resources in the most
useful ways to meet their needs and aspirations [5]. The city, in this perspective,
can be interpreted as “a real functionings system” within which the meaning and
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 119

shape of its material endowments, physical spaces, buildings and infrastructure, is

not an independent variable, but a variable that can depend on several factors: their
conversion within certain operations and their combination with other resources, their
contextual use within different functioning [5]. The capabilities achieved by citizens
in experiencing the city can, therefore, be used as a measure of urban quality.
From the perspective of the capacity approach, the urban quality of life can be
identified as a proxy for urban quality itself.
The urban environment, because of the variety of resources it offers, can in itself
be considered a factor capable of positively affecting capabilities. It may or may
not have those social structures, i.e., those conversion factors capable of converting
resources into capability sets.
In the Sen’s perspective, urban quality cannot be evaluated in an absolute sense,
that is regardless of its users and their capabilities, their real freedoms to act and their
ambitions.
Assuming the capabilities of people as a measure of urban quality can support the
identification of urban policies aimed at promoting different paths and people’s life
projects. In this perspective, urban policies can become devices aimed at broadening
people’s capabilities, allowing alternative lifestyles to coexist within contexts that
could become segregating, in which the range of opportunities available to them
could be narrowed, reducing their ability to convert resources into functionings.
The aim of the paper is to develop the concept of urban quality of life and its
axiology according to the Sen’s perspective.
Based on the capability approach, the study proposes a model and an opera-
tional approach for the measurement of urban quality from the individual and social
perspective.

2 The Sen’s Capability Approach

The capability approach developed by Sen [20] is a theoretical device to assess the
quality of life of people and to guide public policies to pursue social justice objectives.
From Sen’s point of view, it is reductive and misleading to measure inequality
by looking at the material resources people have or have access to, as usually done
in the context of public policies. This is because, while people may have different
aspirations and expectations, they may have a different capacity to use the same
resources in the face of the same system of constraints, making them functional to
individual or collective development paths. This aspect, if neglected, according to
Sen, exposes to the risks of ineffectiveness and ineffectiveness of policies aimed at
reducing inequalities.
Sen proposes, in order to combine the goals of social justice and economic devel-
opment, to assess the disadvantage of people based on criteria concerning the set of
possibilities that are really available to them and not only formally.
120 M. R. Trovato

Fig. 1 The five building blocks of the Capability Approach [9]

In so doing, he proposes a metric of justice different from that of norma-

tivism, according to which the characteristics of a just society can be established
independently and outside the “real” functioning of society itself.
Sen proposes an ethics of objectivity, on the basis of which the metric of justice
must be “anchored to social facts and not to the theories of society” [17].
According to this perspective, it is not important to guarantee people the same
means, but to guarantee them the same possibility of converting the available means
into the purposes to which they attribute value [23]. Based on this perspective, Sen
proposes an interpretative scheme to assess people’s quality of life and their limits
based on certain concepts and the relationship between them (Fig. 1): functionings,
equipment or commodities and capabilities.
The concept of “Functioning” comes from the Aristotelian matrix concerning
“what a person may want—as it gives him value—to do, or to be”.
According to this scheme people in meeting their own needs and aspirations
activate fuctionings: a functioning is the use that people make of the “equipment”
available to them, to achieve their goals; the equipment represent the available
resources.
These equipments are material (physical, economic) and immaterial (resources
such as personal and collective skills).
The set of alternative combinations of functionings in which a person is involved
defines his or her living conditions altogether, while the set of alternative combina-
tions that a person is potentially able to achieve defines the quality of his or her life,
that is, his or her capability.
The latter is therefore a kind of freedom, the substantial freedom for a person to
achieve his objectives from the available resources.
Thus, in defining people’s quality of life, according to Sen [20], focusing only on
available material resources is limiting, and assuming a predetermined and general
view of the functions in which a person would like to engage, the “needs”, is
misleading.
Since the ability to convert means into ends varies according to the nature of
the goals that are set, it is more appropriate to focus on the capability, that is, on
the “real” possibility (actual freedom) of people to implement alternative lifestyles,
combining the available (material and immaterial) equipment in the way they deem
most appropriate to the development of their aspirations.
The significance of this shift in focus from need to capability may appear modest,
but it has, according to Sen, several substantive implications with respect to the
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 121

content of public action (policies aimed at pursuing social justice objectives). The
concept of capability, in fact, refers both to the set of skills and power of people to
convert means into results, and to the ability to make certain resources functional to
the activation of certain functioning.
Conversion factors constitute the personal, environmental, and social conditions
of everyone’s existence. In the original method developed by Sen (1993), Robeyns
[15, 16], conversion factors are basically social structures in the broadest possible
sense. In fact, Sen states that “it is difficult to argue convincingly that individuals in
a society can think, choose or act without being conditioned, in one way or another,
by the nature and logic of the world in which they live” [21].
While conversion factors usually refer to the external structures of the social world
in general, sometimes the policies, which determine the conditions under which
individuals may (or may not) capitalize on their assets [23], the issue of choice/
agency refers more to the internal constraints and Agency’s issue.
Sen notes that skills are “the person’s ability to do the things in question, taking
into account external and internal constraints” [22].
A policy approach focused on the concept of capability then identifies situations
of disadvantage whenever the exercise of this competence and this power is hindered
for some reason. The reasons may differ from case to case, being closely linked to
different personal abilities, systems of non-homogeneous values and the particularity
of certain environments in which people find themselves acting. The identification
of these reasons and the creation of opportunities for overcoming them is exactly the
objective that belongs to public policies aimed at ensuring “equal opportunities for
people”.
According to this perspective, public investment is ineffective if it is aimed at
equipping people with resources which they are not able to use, or which are part of
functionings other than those to which they give priority.
Sen, therefore, proposes to direct the construction of public policies aimed at
increasing the quality of life of people in the perspective of the “capabilities”, that
is, the widening of the possibility for people to achieve the objectives to which they
subjectively attach value.
The information base (typically quantitative and centred on the comparative avail-
ability of material resources) to which policies against inequality normally rely on
is therefore insufficient and misleading for this purpose.
It defines the “territory of justice” as understood and applied by the institutions
(normativism), which presupposes the greater weight attributed to certain operations
and to certain variables within them. On the other hand, interpreting inequality (the
disadvantage) on the basis of Sen’s theory makes it more complicated to construct
policies to reduce it, as it demonstrates the limited usefulness of reference to universal
criteria for assessing quality of life (as far as multiple dimensions of the problem are
concerned), still their definition to a perspective of work in the field: the metric of
the capability is necessarily relative and goes hand in hand with its exercise.
The perspective of the capabilities has design value, which refers to the explo-
ration of the space of the potential functionings, which is identified as that necessary
condition to assess and reduce the disadvantage in a non-reductionistic way.
122 M. R. Trovato

2.1 The City as a Functionings System

In the context of the transformations that are affecting the contemporary urban
scenario, the traditional ordering criteria that allowed to interpret the city according to
stable principles and geometries seem to have completely lost their usefulness, based
on ineluctable relationships (centre/periphery, city/hinterland) and consolidated
logics of operation.
Given its shape and spatial articulation, the present-day city is mostly incom-
prehensible: a succession of objects and spaces that cannot be traced back to the
original urban hierarchies [2], areas that have radically changed function, areas once
marginal that have acquired centrality, new boundaries and new trajectories of devel-
opment, different value attributed to certain places, new function to localized spaces
and structures, new and different meanings attributed to portions of territory.
This circumstance justifies the solicitation of Pierluigi Crosta to regard the territory
for “the use that is made of it” [6] in contrast to the traditional conception of the
territory as a mere physical space within which human activities are distributed.
From the point of view of urban analysis, the call is twofold: on the one hand,
not to confuse the urban environment as it is “actually” with the urban environment
as it should be (for example, according to planning tools provisions) on the other, to
envisage the transformations of the city by taking the point of view of its users.
The latter is a distinct and antithetical conceptual category compared to that of
users, who are normally considered the target audience of policies (in this case urban
policies).
Indeed, among the numerous attempts to read contemporary urban transformation
in the literature, the different descriptions which take the “user’s point of view” are in
principle more effective in that they are concerned with focusing on the relationship
between the change in the form and meaning of the city and its constituent elements
and the changes habits, expectations, and preferences of the urban population.
In these cases, the change in the city is re-interpreted as the effect of the change
in the way people use the city’s territory.
Using the conceptual categories introduced by Sen, we might then say that the
object of the observed change is the functionings within which people employ urban
equipment. The city can be regarded as the set of functionings involving people living
in the urban environment. They use the material and intangible endowments offered
by the latter, combining it with personal resources in the most useful ways to meet
their aspirations and needs.
According to this perspective, functionings are often intertwined, overlapping and
synergistic with each other.
There is a high level of interdependence of functionings that characterize life in
the city, some of which may in some cases identify themselves as a resource within
other functionings.
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 123

Thus, the city can be interpreted as a true “system of functioning” in the sense
that the value of its material endowments—physical spaces, buildings and infras-
tructures—depends on how and to what extent these endowments convert into
functionings and recombine into further and different functionings.

2.2 The Capabilities Achieved by People as a Measure

of Urban Quality of Life

The variety of opportunities and resources available to people to implement alterna-

tive lifestyles (functionings) has always represented the added value of the city, the
specific potential urban system.
This potential has been defined as an “urban effect” [10] referring to a set of
“objective and objectifiable factors”, which can affect people’s quality of life.
The uneven distribution of this effect in the different parts of the city is due to
the material dimension (physical elements, economic endowments) to the intangible
one (personal abilities, organizations, networks of relationships) and especially their
way of combining to support the local organization of daily life.
Urban policies as well as the planning and design of the city must be confronted
with such dimensions and must be able to manage their ability to combine.
If on the one hand, the urban system, due to the variety of resources offered, is a
positive factor for the capability of people, on the other hand their variability within
it, depends on the actual availability and access to the equipment they can benefit
from in the areas of the city in which they live, which partly explains the differences
in terms of living conditions of people within the same city.
The concept of capability is a relative concept, which depends not only on the
equipment of material resources available to people but also on their different ability
to convert such resources into functionings and the variety of purposes, namely of
functionings within which persons are interested in employing them.
It is therefore clear, taking the perspective proposed by Sen, that it makes no
sense to speak of urban quality in the absolute sense, but only with reference to the
point of view of those who use the city, to what are its capabilities and what are its
ambitions. Assuming the capability of people as a measure of the quality of the urban
environment relativizes the debate on cities, to distance oneself from the abstract and
unambiguous visions of the public interest and to direct urban policies in supporting
people’s different life projects.

3 The Urban Quality of Life Based on the Sen’s Capability

Approach

In Sen’s approach, the meanings of funtionings and capabilities are distinct.

124 M. R. Trovato

Sen defines funtionings as: the various things that a person manages to do or be
in leading a life [12].
Some functionings are elementary, such as being in good health, working, being
literate and so on, while others may be more complex, such as achieving self-respect.
Capability is defined as the alternative combinations of functionings that a person
can choose and achieve [12].
Sen does not prescribe a defined and pre-determined list of functionings and
capabilities, but only a few examples of capacities, since he believes that the selection
of such capacities should be the objective of a democratic process, a public discussion.
Within the concept of abilities then distinguishes between basic or primary ones
such as: feeding and being fed, avoiding morbidity and premature death, appearing
in public without shame; and secondary ones such as: be happy, have self-respect
and take part in community life.
M. Nussbaum proposes 10 capabilities, that is, real opportunities based on
personal and social circumstances.
It states that a political order can be considered dignified only if that order ensures
at least a threshold level of these 10 capabilities to all inhabitants [14]:
1. Life: Being able to live to the end of a human life of normal length;
2. Bodily Health: Being able to have good health;
3. Bodily Integrity: Being able to move freely from place to place;
4. Senses, Imagination, and thought: Being able to use the senses, to imagine,
think, and reason;
5. Emotions: Being able to have attachments to things and people outside
ourselves;
6. Practical Reason: Being able to form a conception of the good and to engage in
critical reflection about the planning of one’s life;
7. Affiliation: Being able to live with and toward others, to recognise and show
concern for other human beings; having the social bases of self-respect and
non-humiliation;
8. Other Species: Being able to live with concern for and in relation to animals,
plants, and the world of nature;
9. Play: Being able to laugh, to play, to enjoy recreational activities;
10. Control Over One’s Environment: Political and material.

3.1 The Conceptual Framework

The basic requirements for a model to support the assessment of urban quality of life
are:
1. The adoption of an individual-centred perspective to assess the urban quality of
life: the idea is to investigate the actual uses (access and use) of places, services
and opportunities by each person;
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 125

2. The definition of a notion of operational capability, that is to say, an approach

aimed at measuring capabilities on the basis of the actual exercise by individuals
of a certain number of functionings;
3. Spatial identification of funcionings actually carried out by individuals, in order
to measure capabilities in different urban contexts;
4. The identification of the capabilities achieved in the city.
Sen distinguishes the promotion of the person’s well-being, and the pursuit of
the person’s overall agency goals. Another distinction proposed by Sen is the one
between achievement and the freedom to achieve [12].
Well-being is a narrower concept than the agency’s success. The important distinc-
tion is that the objectives pursued by the agency are not limited to the well-being of
the person. Well-being simply refers to the state of the person.
The goals of a person’s agency could be altruistic in that the individual can assess
the functionings from which benefit the family, friends or society in general. Agency
freedom is freedom to reach whatever the person, as the responsible agent, decides
to obtain.
Based on the capabilities proposed by Sen and Nussbaum, it is possible to select
some capabilities that relate to the dimension of individual Well-being such as Well-
being Achievement and Agency Achievement, but also Well-being Freedom and
Agency Freedom. This selection is aimed at identifying the capacities measured in
the space of fuctionings offered by the urban context:
1. Autonomy: the capability to make autonomous and conscious individual deci-
sions;
2. Self-esteem: the capacity for fulfillment, self-confidence and self-acceptance;
3. Responsibility: the capability to pursue social objectives.
These capacities are those defined by Sen as secondary, as recalled in the previous
paragraph. These capacities are complex and depend on the attainment of other
capacities, which the individual can reach and select either by reference to a purely
individual dimension or by reference to his choices within society; they are of a
moral and political nature.
The measurement of these three capacities that are abstract depend on the
achievement of the following measurable capabilities in the domain of functionings:
1. Health: the capability to be and remain healthy.
2. Home: the capability to have a dignified home.
3. Environment: the capability to live in a healthy, safe, and pleasant environment.
4. Work and education: the capability to have satisfactory work and adequate school
education.
5. Mobility: the capability to move in the space where one lives and works.
6. Game: the capability to engage in play and pleasure, or fun.
7. Participation: the capability to participate in public decisions.
So, in the context of urban quality of life, the seven capacities can be considered as
the urban “supply” of opportunities for each individual to enjoy the three capacities
of autonomy, self-esteem and responsibility.
126 M. R. Trovato

The capabilities Health, Home, Environment are the minimum requirements to

achieve the capabilities Autonomy, Self-esteem, and Responsibility. The capabilities
Work and Education, Mobility, Play, and Participation are the requirements for the
development of skills and knowledge to reach the abilities Autonomy, Self-esteem
and Responsibility.
An evaluation of well-being achievement, we are told, should consider a person’s
capability set, but “this cannot be directly observed and must be surmised from
empirical measures of that person’s achieved functionings” [1].
To make the model operational since the capabilties cannot be measured directly,
but through empirical measures of the functionings achieved it is necessary to identify
those associated to them.
In particular, the functionings depend on the characteristics of the Commodi-
ties that in this study will be defined based on three main characteristics, namely
Avaialbiliy, Quality and Accessibility.
The conceptual model for making the capacity approach for measuring urban
quality of life operational is the one proposed in Fig. 2.

3.2 The Operating Model for Measure the Urban Quality

of Life

The selected functionings represent personal preferences to be or to make, therefore it

is possible to reach a measurement of the capabilities in the space of the functionings
on the base of the implementation of a model of decision that makes operational the
conceptual framework previously defined. To this end it is necessary to identify the
multicriteria approach that is best suited to elicit these preferences. In this case, among
the algorithms proposed in the literature, MAVT (Multiattribute Value Theory) [3,
8, 11, 27] is the most suitable approach to make operational the above conceptual
framework. In fact, it allows to structure and analyze problems of decision by means
of trees of attributes (also called trees of value) and to identify the relative importance
of the criteria in the framework of the assessment that is being carried out.
The standard additive aggregation rule [11] which allows for the overall
assessment of alternative x can be represented by the following formula:


n
V (x) = λi vi (x)
i=1

where n represents the number of attributes, λi the weight of the attribute i and
vi (x) is the value function of the individual attribute reflecting the performance of
alternative x with respect to the attribute i.
The sum of the weights is normalized to one and the function of value vi (x) can
assume values between 0 and 1, in particular 1 indicates the best possible value,
i.e., the performance of the alternative for a given attribute best meets the objective,
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 127

Fig. 2 The conceptual framework: the urban quality of life based on the Sen’s capability approach

while 0 indicates the worst performance, values within this range refer to performance
levels in terms of objectives between the best and the worst.
Weights indicate the relative importance of an attribute from its worst to best level
and in comparison, with other attributes [11, 27].
To detect the individual preferences/decisions to be or to make, i.e., the operations
and then the actual capacities that can be achieved, a questionnaire can be used. This
tool has been widely used in literature.
To detect this set of preferences in the space of instrumental functionings to
measure indirectly capabilities, the questionnaire should be structured appropriately
[4].
The questionnaire should be structured to be able to detect for everyone the
importance and level of functionings, with reference to the three conditions of
good and services, namely availability, quality and accessibility. In this regard, the
questionnaire will be structured based on a series of questions such as:
Is there/available and how much is there?
128 M. R. Trovato

How is it organized/ offered and what is the quality?

How often and by what means can it be accessible?
Where do you live? In which neighbourhood?
The latest question allows you to map information in the different contexts of the
city and makes this model also applicable to a scale of detail as the neighbourhood.
Based on the conceptual framework, the interviewee is asked to declare a score for
the single functionings f Hi , f H s j , f Ek , f Ml , f W E m , f PY n , f Pr in a 1–10 range; this range
is compatible with the metrics of judgment of the single subjects. These assessments
will then be transformed into a scale between 0 and 1 to align the assessments with
the MAVT approach. At the same time, the interviewee is asked to declare in a 1–10
range the relative importance of individual functionings f Hi , f H s j , f Ek , f Ml , f W E m ,
f PY n , f Pr . In addition, it is asked to declare in a 1 to 10 range the relative importance
of each capability C H , C H s , C E , C M , C W E , C PY , C P .
To measure the urban quality of life in the space of functionings, such as well-
being or the capability achieved by individuals and the community, two models are
proposed which are presented in Figs. 3 and 4.
These models make the conceptual framework previously presented operational.

Fig. 3 Estimate model urban quality of life in the individual perspective

Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 129

Fig. 4 Estimate model urban quality of life in the social perspective

4 Discussion and Conclusions

The complexity of the contemporary city from an economic, social, cultural, natural,
health, environmental point of view in general, and regarding the effects of climate
change, poses a problem of urban quality of life for various reasons. Traditional inter-
pretative schemes fail to grasp the multidimensionality of the issues that characterize
contemporary cities, just as they fail to provide adequate support for the development
of policies to overcome them.
130 M. R. Trovato

In the absence of appropriate interpretative instruments, policies fail to adequately

combine the objectives of social justice and economic development, just as they fail
to promote sustainable development in the broadest sense of this concept.
The very concept of sustainability must be founded on an axiology based on
authentic and intersubjective values, arising from a coordination between individual
axiologies and socio-systemic normativities, that is according to an ethics of objec-
tivity, as proposed by Sen, in which metrics must be “anchored to social facts and
not to the theories of society” [17], in contrast with normativism, according to which
the characteristics of a society can be established independently and outside the
“real” functioning of society itself. The definition of an interpretative model aimed
at promoting the sustainable development of cities and their policies, in a perspective
centred on the individual was sought in the Sen’ capability approach. Accordingly,
the city can be interpreted as a real “fuctionings system” within which the meaning
and form of its material equipment, physical spaces, buildings and infrastructure and
its intangible endowments, depend on their conversion within certain fuctionings.
The conversion of the tangible and intangible endowments of the city depends on
the people’s capabilities to convert such resources into functionings within which
people are interested in employing them. Measuring the value of urban quality from
the perspective of capability approach means recognising as merit the actual conver-
sion of urban resources into functionings selected by the individuals living there,
by which they achieve individual well-being and can achieve collective well-being,
and therefore as an urban quality of life in the individual and social perspective.
The conceptual and operational model proposed to measure the urban quality of life,
defined based on the Sen’ capability approach, allows to measure the urban quality of
life in sphere of individual and collective functionings. The operational model aims
at measuring the functionings selected by the individuals, to whom they attribute a
weight that identifies the level of importance attributed to the single functioning in
the context of the achievement of the single capacity. Each capability is a combina-
tion of functionings with different weights in relation to the importance attributed by
individuals, namely according to Well-being freedom. In the individual perspective,
the aggregation of individual capacities, based on an assigned weight system which
takes account of the individual choices of being or doing, allows for a measure of the
urban quality of life, that is, of Well-being individual as Well-being achievement.
Sen highlights the importance of individual Well-being but considers more impor-
tant Agency as the objectives pursued, by it goes far beyond the well-being of the
person, i.e., they extend to the well-being of family, friends, and society. Pursuing the
objectives of the Agency, as the responsible agent, is the same as selecting those func-
tionings whose achievements allow to produce collective well-being. In the social
perspective having to take into account the weights attributed to individual function-
ings and capabilities, the aggregation of the individual capabilities is obtained as a
result of an evaluation process aimed at identifying a system of weights to be placed
at the base of a shared selection of weights that mediate the individual Agencies and
allows to reach a measure of the urban quality of the life from the social point of
view, that is of the social Well-being and as Agency Achievement. The operating
model provides a measure of the urban quality of life for the city, but also on a
Axiology of Urban Quality. The City as a Functionings System 131

neighbourhood scale; in fact, within the questionnaire one is requested to declare the
place where he/she lives.
A city-wide survey campaign could produce a mapping of the urban quality
of life for the different neighbourhoods, highlighting the asymmetries in terms of
capabilities achieved.
A map of the capabilities on an urban scale could support the decision-makers
in defining specific urban policies aimed at removing detected asymmetries and/or
increasing their achievement. In this perspective, urban policies can become devices
aimed at expanding people’s capabilities.

References

1. Alkire S (2002) Valuing freedoms. Sen’s capability approach and poverty reduction. Oxford
University Press, Oxford
2. Balducci A (2006) Periferie, nuove politiche urbane e approcci partecipativi, In: Belli A (ed)
Oltre la città. Pensare la periferia, Cronopio-Ventre Zoom, Napoli
3. Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer
Academic Press, Boston
4. Blečić I, Cecchini A, Talu V (2013) The capability approach in urban quality of life and urban
policies: towards a conceptual framework. In: Serreli S (eds) City project and public space.
Urban and landscape perspectives, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
94-007-6037-0_17
5. Cottino P (2006) Capability approach e politiche integrate di quartiere. Territorio 43:65–75
6. Crosta P (2001) Pratiche. Il territorio «è l’uso che se ne fa». FrangoAngeli, Milano
7. Giannelli A, Giuffrida S, Trovato MR (2018) Madrid Rio Park. Symbolic values and contingent
valuation. Valori e Valutazioni 21:75–85
8. Greco, Ehrgott M, Figueira J (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys.
Springer, p 78
9. Goerne A (2010) The capability approach in social policy analysis. Yet another concept? REC-
WP 03/2010 working papers on the reconciliation of work and welfare in Europe. RECWOWE
Publication, Dissemination and Dialogue Centre, Edinburgh
10. Guiducci R (1991) Periferie tra degrado e riqualificazione, FrancoAngeli, Milano
11. Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value
tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
12. Nussbaum M, Sen A (1993) The quality of life. Clarendon Press, Oxford
13. Nussbaum M, Glover J (1995) Women, culture and development: a study of human capabilities.
Clarendon Press and Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York
14. Nussbaum MC (2003) Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice. Fem
Econ 9(2–3):33
15. Robeyns I (2005) Selecting capabilities for quality of life measurement. Soc Indic Res 74:191–
215
16. Robeyns I (2005) The capability approach: a theoretical survey. J Hum Dev 6(1):191–215
17. Salais R (2004) Incorporating the capability approach into social and employment policies. In:
Salais R, Villeneuve R (eds) Europe and the politics of capabilities. Cambridge U.P., Cambridge
18. Sen AK (1980) Equality of what? The Tanner lectures on human values. In: McMurrin S (eds)
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
19. Sen AK (1992) Inequality reexamined. Oxford University Press, New York
20. Sen AK (1999) Development as freedom. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK
21. Sen AK (2001) Development as freedom. Oxford University Press, Oxford
132 M. R. Trovato

22. Sen AK (2002) Health: perception versus observation. BMJ 324:860–861

23. Sen AK (2009) The idea of justice. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge,
Massachusetts
24. Trovato MR, Giuffrida S (2018) The monetary measurement of flood damage and the valuation
of the proactive policies in Sicily. Geosciences 8(141). https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8
040141
25. Trovato MR, Giuffrida S (2018) The protection of territory in the perspective of the intergener-
ational equity. In: Seminar of the Italian society of property evaluation and investment decision.
Green energy and technology, vol F8. Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, pp 469–485. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78271-3_37
26. Trovato MR (2020) Human capital approach in the economic assessment of interventions for
the reduction of seismic vulnerability in historic centres. Sustainability 12(8059):1–33
27. Von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W (1986) Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge
The Great Concentration. Demography,
Economy, Real Estate Values
and the Development of Italian
Metropolitan Cities

Ezio Micelli and Eleonora Righetto

Abstract Two major events have impacted Italian cities: the economic crises of 2008
and 2012 and the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021. This research aims to verify
whether, and if so how, Italy’s metropolitan cities, which play a role in regional areas,
have transformed over the past decade. To examine this, real estate market values,
which are considered an indicator of the attractiveness of cities, were examined,
together with other variables describing the economic and demographic trends of the
territory. Cluster analysis was chosen to represent the observed changes, aggregating
cities according to common patterns. To obtain a long-term assessment the analysis
considered the cities’ reactions between 2012 and 2022. The results revealed stable
and rigorous trends. In the main cluster, which includes Milan, a process of economic-
territorial concentration is observed, which is influenced neither by the 2008–2012
crisis or the pandemic. In the second cluster, peripheral metropolitan cities that have
undergone very limited growth developments are identified. Finally, the third cluster
consists of cities with growth opportunities and critical economic and demographic
aspects.

Keywords Metropolitan cities · Housing market · Urban concentration · Covid-19

1 Introduction

In the last decade, Italian cities have experienced two significant events: the economic
and social crises of 2008 and 2012 and the COVID-19 pandemic that has significantly
impacted collective life in 2020 and 2021. These two events have had the rank

E. Micelli (B)
Department of Architecture and Art, Università Iuav di Venezia, 30135 Venice, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
E. Righetto
Department of Management Engineering, University of Padua, 36100 Vicenza, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 133
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_10
134 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

and scope to transform, at least in power, the evolutionary path of Italian cities,
accelerating their evolutionary dynamics or modifying their development path.
Research has been crucial in addressing the second shock, despite the limited
time that has elapsed [31]. Several studies have analysed important issues such as
the dynamics of virus spread [1, 18], the responsiveness of organisms to epidemic
spread [17], community impacts [54, 56], the evolution of housing preferences [55],
and the need for new settlement solutions to manage future similar events [13, 19, 48].
This inquiry has considerably deepened the comprehension of the pandemic’s effects
on Italian urban centers and proffered glimpses into conceivable future scenarios,
thus providing invaluable insights for urban and territorial schematics.
The study analyses the responses of Italian cities to past economic downturns
and the pandemic, analyzing demographics and economics. It seeks to understand
if cities follow shared or diverse paths based on attributes, exceptional events, or
trends. The method uses real estate assessments to grasp urban changes, reflecting
inherent locational advantages. Analyzing property trends in metropolitan areas
requires considering demographics and economics that explain value fluctuations
[9, 27].
This survey focuses on metropolitan municipalities, in which authorities have
spurred initiatives aimed at propelling specific key cities, thus outlining their role as
pivotal territorial hubs. This journey began with Italian Law 142 of 1990 and ended
with Law 56 of 2014, endowing metropolitan municipalities with the task of shep-
herding the nation’s development by evolving into cardinal touchpoints for expansive
territorial domains. By homing in on the subset of metropolitan municipalities, the
focus narrows onto the nation’s most consequential urban centers in administrative
terms, though not necessarily in economic and societal dimensions [10, 37, 38, 41].
The article is organised into four sections. In the initial segment, two poten-
tial evolutionary perspectives of cities in response to the dual shocks of crisis and
pandemic supported by an extensive body of literature on the subject. The subse-
quent section outlines the data sources used for the investigation. In the ensuing
segment, the expounded statistical analyses take center stage, while the ultimate
section discusses the findings.

2 Concentration or Polycentrism? Development

Hypotheses Under Comparison for Italian Metropolitan
Cities

The economic crisis and pandemic are linked with the development trajectories of
national and international cities. Cities are not destined for decline [30], but instead
have experienced a period of triumph in the twenty-first century [29, 33, 57]. Cities
play a crucial role in the development of countries, but not all are equally equipped.
In Italy, 14 metropolitan cities have been identified as reference points for territorial
development. However, these metropolitan cities differ in many aspects, so it is
The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values … 135

legitimate to ask whether all of them can grow in the same way or whether some
have a better chance of leading the country’s development.
It is useful to place such a research question in an appropriate theoretical frame-
work. The range and variety of territorial resources of cities—human, material and
immaterial—represent the key element underlying their development. Recent studies
have shown how concentration in a limited number of cities is the natural consequence
of the complexity of the technological and economic processes that foster growth.
For example, in the United States, the 10 most innovative metropolitan cities have
less than a quarter of the total population but generate 48% of patents and a third of
GDP [46]. Highly complex activities tend to be “concentrated in a limited number
of large cities compared to less complex activities” [3].
The concentration of innovative activities is closely linked to development, which
then becomes an engine of growth [49]. Studies focusing on American cities have
confirmed that the most densely populated areas of metropolitan areas are the
preferred location for high-tech startups [24]. Startups exploiting the opportunities
of technological innovation feed off the density and wealth of large metropolises,
where they can find highly skilled human resources [5] and interested financial capital
[25]. A highly differentiated geography emerges, with cities and territories benefiting
from the concentration of human and infrastructural capital, taking advantage of the
opportunities related to creative activities [23] and the knowledge economy [12],
while other cities face the loss of population and wealth, being associated with lower
value-added jobs and activities [11, 43, 46, 52, 58].
Cities do not grow only through population growth. A virtuous development path is
also made possible by the variety of activities that interact and enrich each other. The
contributions of Alfred Marshall and Jane Jacobs have highlighted the importance
of the interaction between very different economic sectors [22, 26], and today, there
is a growing scientific interest in defining the characteristics and dynamics of this
interaction [34, 50, 59]. Thus, scale and variety become the competitive factors of
contemporary cities. Italian metropolitan cities struggle to compete at the same level,
and it is to be expected that some poles will assert themselves at the expense of others
in territorial competition.
The research proposes to examine the development of metropolitan cities consid-
ering economic and pandemic crises, to determine whether Italy has opted for concen-
tration in one or more cities as the country’s growth engine or whether all cities or
a significant portion of them have driven the development of more extensive territo-
rial areas. The dataset used in this survey incorporates information previously used
in Micelli and Righetto’s research [44] on the development of metropolitan cities,
concerning the cities of Catania and Messina, which became metropolitan cities after
the promulgation of Law 56/2014.
The hypothesis is that an answer can be obtained by analyzing the real estate values
of cities, which represent a synthetic indicator of a city’s attractiveness compared
with others. Economic theory defines rent as ‘the objectification in economic and
price terms, and the assignment to each land or property, of the value that individual
economic actors explicitly or implicitly attribute to each territorial situation in their
processes of defining location choices’ [8]. In essence, rent is the monetary reflection
136 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

of the real advantages offered by a piece of land or building [7], and it varies over
time, highlighting the growth or decline of cities.

3 Property Values, Demographic and Economic Data

The current research examines the capitals of the 14 Italian metropolitan cities, as
established by Italian Law No. 56 of 7 April 2014 and subsequently expanded in
2015: Milan, Turin, Genoa, Venice, Bologna, Florence, Rome, Naples, Bari, Reggio
di Calabria, Cagliari, Palermo, Catania, and Messina.
The analysis employs the values of the metropolitan cities’ capital municipalities
because of their ability to more clearly and distinctly express trends of concentration
or abandonment in demographic and economic terms. The hypothesis assumed is that
a city’s attractiveness can be measured with precision in its most central places—in
line with traditional models from von Thunen onwards [7]—and, thus, in the case of
Italian metropolitan cities, in the capital municipalities.
The first variable taken into consideration to analyse the evolution of metropolitan
cities is the variety of real estate purchase and sale values in the residential market,
which is the most representative of market variations. Specifically, data acquisition
was carried out using two datasets of real estate quotations from both public and
private sources: the Observatory of the Real Estate Market edited by Agenzia delle
Entrate1 and online platform of real estate listings Immobiliare.it2 (Table 1 and Figs. 1
and 2).
In 2012, the average real estate values of the cities analysed amounted to 2,645
Euro/sqm, while in 2022, they fall to 2,273 Euro/sqm, with a minimum of 864 Euro/
sqm for Reggio di Calabria and a maximum of 4,552 Euro/sqm for Milan. Cities
in central Italy, such as Florence and Rome, recorded values above 3,000 Euro/
sqm, while cities in the south showed significantly lower values. In the period under
consideration, a 16% fall in property values was observed throughout the entire
peninsula, except for Milan, which recorded growth, with average values of more
than 37%, and Florence, with an increase of almost 5%. The most important decreases
were found in some large cities in the center-north, such as Genoa (with a decrease
in the average value of more than 38%), Turin and Rome (with a decrease in value
of more than one-fifth), followed by cities in the south, in particular Messina and
Catania, with a decrease of more than 30%.
The variables used to understand the movement of real estate values and evolution
of metropolitan cities concerning the demographic, economic and infrastructural
development of the cities analysed (Table 2).

1 Agenzia delle Entrate, Observatory of the Real estate Market. Available at: https://www.agenzi
aentrate.gov.it/ (Accessed 21 April 2023).
2 Immobiliare.it, Property price data in Italy. Available at: https://www.immobiliare.it/mercato-imm

obiliare/ (Accessed 21 April 2023).

The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values … 137

Table 1 Average property values of metropolitan cities in the years 2012 and 2022 and percentage
changes between 2012 and 2022
Number City Euro/sqm 2012 Euro/sqm 2022 Var. % 2012/2022 (%)
1 Turin 2,711 1,969 −27.35
2 Genoa 2,723 1,667 −38.77
3 Milan 3,302 4,552 37.87
4 Venice 3,288 2,677 −18.59
5 Bologna 3,282 2,960 −9.82
6 Florence 3,245 3,394 4.60
7 Rome 4,626 3,400 −26.51
8 Naples 2,925 2,628 −10.14
9 Bari 2,219 1,905 −14.17
10 Reggio di C 1,139 864 −24.14
11 Palermo 1,826 1,411 −22.75
12 Cagliari 2,054 2,038 −0.78
13 Catania 1,874 1,251 −33.25
14 Messina 1,813 1,112 −38.68
Average 2,645 2,273 −15.89

Fig. 1 Average values of residential real estate in metropolitan cities in the years 2012 and 2022

From a demographic point of view, a lack of homogeneity is observed among the

cities examined. By 2022, Rome had almost three million inhabitants, while Milan
had 1.3 million, Naples and Turin had about 900,000. Palermo was the second most
populous city in the south after Naples. Genoa, with around 600,000 inhabitants,
138 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

Fig. 2 Average values of residential real estate in metropolitan cities in the years 2012 and 2022
on 100 base

followed Milan and Turin in order of size in the northern parts of Italy. Bologna,
Florence and Bari represented three medium-sized metropolitan cities with about
400,000 inhabitants each. Finally, Venice, Cagliari, Reggio di Calabria, Catania and
Messina had less than 300,000 inhabitants (Table 2).
According to data provided by Istat3 on the Tuttitalia.it4 portal, from 2012 to
2022, metropolitan cities attracted a larger population, with an average increase of
2%. However, this growth was uneven, reflecting an initial phase of recovery after
the economic crisis, which was followed by a significant decrease, except for Milan,
Bologna and Rome, which were more attractive.
After 10 years, in general, the trend saw the cities of the south decreasing, unlike
the cities of the centre and north. Genoa in the north and Messina, Palermo, Reggio
di Calabria and Naples recorded the greatest declines.
Similar dynamics can be observed for the change in the population of working
age, that is, between 15 and 64 years, reflecting a consolidated trend: the inhabitants
of southern Italy have been emigrating to the capital cities of the north (Table 2).
The dynamics of the main sectors of activity, manufacturing and advanced services
are rendered by the variation of local units present in the cities for each economic
sector (according to 2-digit ATECO codes).
Regarding secondary sector activities, in 2012, the cities of Rome and Milan
recorded the highest amount of local units in the manufacturing sector. However,
when looking at the ratio between the population and number of local units, the
southern Italian cities had fewer units than the northern ones. Moreover, there was

3Istat.it. Available at: https://www.istat.it/ (Accessed: 21 April 2023).

4Tuttitalia.it, Guide to the Municipalities, Provinces and Regions of Italy, Available at: https://
www.tuttitalia.it/ (Accessed: 21 April 2023).
Table 2 Absolute and percentage changes in real estate, economic and demographic variables relating to the territorial capital of the metropolitan cities under
review (2012–2022)
City Δ% Δ% People Δ Δ% Local Δ Local Δ Δ% Δ GDP Δ Presence Δ Δ%
People 15–64 years People hand-held financial Income GDP per Sturtup (1) or University Real
(%) (%) 15–64 years units (%) units per capita absence estate
capita (0) High values
(%) speed (%)
Turin −1.3 −2.1 −11,465 −9.4 574 1,664 8.7 1,977 432 1 6 −27.4
Genoa −3.1 −3.9 −13,960 −13.8 −165 282 2.2 490 181 1 1 −38.8
Milan 10.8 16.0 123,482 −4.5 8,543 1,870 11.0 3,375 2,302 1 7 37.9
Venice −1.8 −1.6 −2,558 −13.1 −39 −64 1.8 399 79 0 2 −18.6
Bologna 5.5 8.2 18,901 −12.5 736 1,034 7.1 1,769 208 1 2 −9.8
Florence 0.7 4.4 9,645 −8.3 267 328 5.0 1,203 156 1 2 4.6
Rome 6.0 4.9 82,944 −11.1 4,352 −25 4.8 1,224 1,312 1 9 −26.5
Naples −4.1 −6.5 −41,744 −10.3 1,139 −225 1.7 347 439 1 4 −10.1
Bari 1.3 −3.0 −6,121 −14.2 138 419 4.2 877 154 0 2 −14.2
Reggio C −4.3 −8.9 −10,767 −15.5 118 728 6.3 1,163 46 0 3 −24.1
The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values …

Palermo −2.9 −8.0 −35,112 −10.9 408 −335 1.7 345 166 0 1 −22.8
Cagliari 0.2 −4.7 −4,604 −14.0 −70 932 7.0 1,644 79 0 1 −0.8
Catania 2.5 −4.0 −29,190 −11.9 397 455 2.1 365 121 0 2 −33.3
Messina −8.5 −12.9 −20,728 −8.6 53 335 1.4 279 44 0 1 −38.7
139
140 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

an average decrease in units of 10% over the period 2012–2022, which affected the
whole country uniformly. Milan and Florence were the most resilient cities to the
crisis, with a decrease of 4.5% and 8.3% respectively (Table 2).
Regarding services, the survey focused on high-value-added activities to identify
concentration processes specific to certain advanced services. The research collected
and summed up the number of local units surveyed by Istat in some relevant services:
insurance, financial-insurance activities and professional, scientific and technical
activities. The data show that, in the period 2012–2022, the number of local units in
this sector increased on average by 7.3% in all Italian cities, with an increase of more
than 15% in Milan. The cities of Bologna, Rome, Naples and Catania followed, with
more moderate growth, with an average increase of 7% (Table 2).
The economic growth of the cities surveyed was assessed through data from the
Department of Finance (MEF)5 by looking at the change in average income per
capita and gross domestic product per capita. The variable on average income per
capita showed an increase of 2.5% over a decade. The highest values were found in
northern cities, with Turin and Milan at the top. Southern cities, on the other hand,
showed more moderate growth, with an average increase of less than 2% and an
average absolute increase of less than 500 e over 10 years. A decrease of more than
1% was observed only in the cities of Naples and Palermo (Table 2).
Also, when it comes to the per capita gross domestic product (GDP), an increase
of almost 5% was observed over the period examined. Milan and Catania presented
the highest and lowest values of GDP per capita among all other metropolitan cities,
respectively, at 33,936 euro/year in 2022 and 18,093 euro/year in 2022. On average,
values below 20,000 euro were recorded in all southern cities, with an average
increase of slightly more than 3% (Table 2).
An overall indicator of the ability to promote and support entrepreneurial activity
in sectors with high value added and potential development is represented by the
number of startups formally registered with the Chamber of Commerce.6 In the
period 2012–2022, the average investment in new startups per metropolitan city
stood at 170. However, there were some positive exceptions, such as an increase of
over 2,000 startups in Milan and over 1,200 in Rome, while Reggio Calabria and
Messina registered numbers of less than 40 units (Table 2).
From the point of view of infrastructure, the presence of high-speed rail service
has been considered to assess the accessibility levels of metropolitan cities [47]. The
service connects the central and northern cities, with some connections reaching
as far as Naples. Four cities—Venice, Bari, Genoa and Reggio di Calabria—are
served by a high-speed service using the traditional infrastructures but with reduced
performance. Therefore, for these cities, the service was absent. In a historical context
characterised by a close relationship between knowledge and development, it was

5 Department of Finance (MEF), Tax declaration and income, Finance Department. Available at:
https://www1.finanze.gov.it/ (Accessed: 21 April 2023).
6 Chamber of Commerce, Business Register | Official Data. Available at: https://www.registroimpr

ese.it/home (Accessed: 23 April 2023).

The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values … 141

important to identify a variable that could summarize the contribution of knowledge

infrastructures to the territorial capture [14].
The knowledge infrastructure variable represents the sum of the values of public,
and private universities and colleges in the cities under study in the period 2012–
2022.7 The values remained constant over the period considered. Rome stood out
for having the largest knowledge production and dissemination institutions, with
nine universities, followed by Milan and Turin, with seven and six, respectively.
The other nine metropolitan cities generally had one or two institutions, except for
Naples, which had four (Table 2).
To ensure the reliability of the survey results and to consider the importance
and scale of the phenomena that characterise some metropolitan cities, variations
were assessed in both percentage and absolute terms. Within the framework of the
survey, the determinants of demand were prioritised to establish the property value.
It was assumed that, on the supply side, all cities had similar conditions for inter-
vention in the real estate market through appropriate planning policies. Furthermore,
it was considered that the real estate and construction sector had a national, if not
international, character and would be able to operate between different metropolitan
cities. Consequently, in the models developed to identify the factors of attractive-
ness, demand-side variables were considered decisive, while supply-side aspects
were found to be irrelevant.

4 Data Analysis for a Map of Metropolitan Cities

The choice of data analysis methodology stemmed from the underlying objec-
tives of the research, which aimed to understand the change in the development of
metropolitan cities following the economic crisis and pandemic shock. Cluster anal-
ysis is an unsupervised learning statistical technique used to recognise patterns in a
data set. In the present study, a nonhierarchical cluster analysis based on MacQueen’s
method was employed using the k-means algorithm and relying on Euclidean distance
to partition the dataset into exclusive groups [20, 21, 32, 40]. The variables were then
standardised to Z-scores through zero-score normalisation to eliminate the scaling
factor, which may otherwise affect the algorithm, making it clearer to read each
cluster and the variations of each variable from the identified mean.
In the period between 2012 and 2022, an elaboration of the dataset focused on
metropolitan cities was conducted to assess their reaction to the 2008 and 2012
crises and the differences between them. The analysis of the relationships between the
variables was carried out using the correlation matrix, with a Pearson’s coefficient test
to assess the level of significance. The analysis revealed a clear trend in metropolitan
cities, with the presence of two distinct clusters and third cluster with contrasting
characteristics (Fig. 3).

7Data on the number of universities come from: Wikipedia, Ranking of Italian universities by
number of students (Accessed: 23 April 2023).
142 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

Fig. 3 The final centers of the clusters of standardised changes in metropolitan cities (2012–
2022). Cluster number: (1) Turin, Bologna, Florence, Rome; (2) Genoa, Venice, Naples, Reggio Di
Calabria, Palermo, Cagliari, Bari, Catania, Messina; (3) Milan

The first group, consisting of the cities of Turin, Bologna, Florence and Rome,
presented contradictory characteristics. Despite above-average growth in all indica-
tors, there was a negative trend in real estate values over the decade compared with
the average for metropolitan cities. This group was found to have significant differ-
ences, for example, with Bologna showing rapid development yet other cities strug-
gling to recover growth in real estate values. A contrasting case can be observed for
Rome, which showed a more significant decline in property values than the average
(−27.5%), but the other indicators, except for GDP per capita, were above average.
The four cities in the center-north belonging to the first cluster showed economic
performance represented by a GDP per capita above the average but were counter-
balanced by the demographic decreases and the fall in real estate values, both of
which were above the average.
Contrary to this, in the second cluster, the southern cities, along with Genoa,
saw a fall in real estate values in line with the average of the metropolitan cities.
The demographic, economic and infrastructural indicators of these cities were below
average. Genoa and Venice experienced a decrease in the number of employees
in the manufacturing sector and in high-value-added tertiary activities, causing an
above-average decrease in real estate values.
Finally, the third cluster exclusively concerned Milan, which was characterised
by values clearly above average. Demographic and economic flows, together with
infrastructural and intangible capital, were consistent with significant growth in real
estate values (+37.8%), the highest ever compared with the Italian average (+15.9%),
which held true for all other selected indicators.
The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values … 143

The analysis of the F-statistics provides some additional relevant considerations.

The most significant figure concerns the change in local units of advanced services
(F = 28.002). This makes it possible to interpret the three clusters based on a below-
average demographic performance, both in the case of the southern and some central-
northern cities, while Milan and Rome registered a significant growth process over
the five-year period considered. The second variable, which was characterised by
a significant F-statistic, was the growth of start-ups (F = 46.253), which can be
considered as an indicator of a city’s ability to promote entrepreneurial development.
The two variables are positively correlated in a significant way, confirming a
demographic transformation process driven by the opportunities offered by larger
cities open to entrepreneurial development. The correlation matrix confirms how, in
the medium long term, the average values of the real estate market reflect profound
tendencies of the society and economy of the territories. The correlation between
the trend of real estate market values and the growth of the population and local
economy has been widely verified.

5 The Concentration of Development and Its Possible

Evolutions

The distribution of real estate values reflects the territorial changes in the country.
During the decade in question, all cities saw a contraction or invariance in real
estate values, except Milan, which recorded an average increase of 40%. Milan also
surpassed the capital, becoming the only Italian city with an average of over 4,000
euro/sqm. Milan attracts population and workers in the tertiary sectors with high value
added while recording significant growth in both GDP per capita and income, thanks
to a solid endowment of tangible and intangible infrastructure. This phenomenon has
persisted, despite the double crisis of 2008 and 2012 and the 2020–2021 pandemic.
The pandemic did not influence the trend of urban concentration, contradicting
the hypothesis that it could lead to relocation to smaller places or abandoned villages.
Instead, the empirical evidence confirms a trend of concentration that, in the decade
under consideration, benefited only one city in the entire country. The reasons for this
trend are not the subject of this research, but recent studies have shown that Milan’s
attractiveness is the result of a strategy of international real estate finance, which
has selected the Lombard capital as a private area for its investment [2], exploiting
the important territorial capital resources available [7], the result, at least in part, of
significant collective investments [36].
In contrast, the metropolitan cities of the south have shown below-average perfor-
mance in the real estate market. So far, the pandemic does not seem to have
significantly influenced the demographic dynamics and attractiveness of the cities
considered. New location phenomena in southern cities, such as ‘south working’,
as promoted through agile working strategies, have not yet had a significant impact
[45]. Furthermore, it would be wrong to use a traditional division between north
144 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

and south to interpret the different performances of metropolitan cities. The analysis
showed that both southern metropolitan cities (Naples, Reggio di Calabria, Palermo,
Cagliari) were within the same cluster and two important northern cities, such as
Genoa and Venice.
The cities in the third cluster have shown more problems over the decade consid-
ered. This cluster also included the capital city, which, despite an extraordinary
endowment of tangible and intangible capital, has recorded a decrease in real estate
values, ranking second after Milan in terms of average value. This fact deserves partic-
ular attention: according to [53], since the 1980s, capital cities have seen their share
of gross product rise steadily, generating territorial disparities. However, Rome’s
property values have shown the city’s inability to keep pace with Milan and other
medium-sized cities such as Florence, Turin and Bologna, which have shown more
significant performance.
The case of Florence shows stability in real estate values over time. The growth of
employment in the advanced tertiary sector and modest decrease in the manufacturing
sector have pointed to the prospect that the Tuscan city may turn into the metropolitan
pole of reference for the textile and leather district, which represents an absolute
manufacturing excellence [15, 28, 35, 55].
Bologna recorded a remarkable economic recovery, reflecting its role as a refer-
ence pole in a region with highly competitive industrial and service sectors and strong
export capacity [51]. The cities of Florence and Bologna could represent the new
metropolitan poles of development, in evolution to the model previously dominated
by Milan.
The analysis has highlighted the importance of demographic flows in the forma-
tion and variation of real estate values. In the case of the capital, the problem seems
to be more related to the ability to retain residents rather than attract new popula-
tion, with a clear impact on the decrease of real estate values. Finally, the role of
physical infrastructure in the value of different metropolitan cities is a problematic
aspect. There are no significant correlations between the infrastructure investments
and real estate values of cities. However, apart from Naples, none of the southern
cities has high-speed rail connections, unlike the cities in the second cluster and
Milan. Furthermore, the two northern cities in the most fragile cluster also lack
high-speed rail access. Although the results are not yet statistically significant, the
survey highlights how the lack of high-speed rail may be a crucial factor for the
competitiveness of cities [6].

6 Conclusion

In the last decade, Italian cities have faced two significant events: the 2008 and
2012 financial crises and the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021. The aim of this
research was to investigate the extent and nature of the transformations that Italian
cities have undergone as a result of these events.
The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values … 145

The study focused on the recently established metropolitan cities, which have been
given a role by the legislature in regional areas. The evolution of cities has assumed
two possibilities. The first involves concentration processes in one or more cities
following development patterns established in other countries. The second, in line
with the legislator’s intent, is a homogeneous development consistent with the iden-
tification of up to14 cities in the country. The survey used real estate market values
as a synthetic indicator of a city’s competitive capacity. Other variables considered
included economic growth, demographic development, resource availability, and
spatial factors influencing accessibility. Through cluster analysis, it was possible to
explore the configuration of metropolitan cities and their development in response
to the challenges of the last decade.
The survey results indicate that from 2012 to 2022 the structure of the Italian
metropolitan cities has been oriented towards a concentration, of which only Milan
was a beneficiary. Milan consistently showed above-average indicators, which are
reflected in an increase in real estate values, despite the general downturn in the real
estate market.
The present research initially explored the development of Italian metropolitan
cities through the analysis of their real estate markets. It is important to empha-
sise that this perspective represents only a partial aspect and could be supplemented
and refined. Further studies could focus on adressing the challenges faced by strug-
gling metropolitan cities and those experiencing a process of progressive affirmation.
In recent years, urban and territorial studies have focused on the country’s inland
areas [39], small towns and villages [4, 16]. However, it is also important to give
similar attention to the country’s large cities. These cities have faced a complex
and contrasting development path and their achievements and developments have a
significant impact on the lives of a large part of the country [42]. Therefore, it will
be necessary to further investigate such issues to have a more complete and in-depth
understanding of the development of Italian cities.

References

1. Arbel Y, Fialkoff C, Kerner A, Kerner M (2022) Do COVID19 infection rates change over time
and space? Population density and socio-economic measures as regressors. Cities 120:103400.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103400
2. Baiardi L, Bellintani S, Celani A, Ciaramella A, Puglisi V, Tagliaro C (2019) The evolu-
tion in planning and designing new corporate headquarters in Milan: perspectives for urban
resilience. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 296(1):012045. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/
296/1/012045
3. Balland PA, Jara-Figueroa C, Petralia SG, Steijn MPA, Rigby DL, Hidalgo CA (2020) Complex
economic activities concentrate in large cities. Nat Hum Behav 4(3):248–254. https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41562-019-0803-3
4. Barbera F, Cersosimo D, De Rossi A (2022) Contro i borghi: Il Belpaese che dimentica i paesi.
Donzelli, Roma
5. Berry CR, Glaeser EL (2005) The divergence of human capital levels across cities. Pap Reg
Sci 84(3):407–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2005.00047.x
146 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

6. Bruzzone F, Cavallaro F, Nocera S (2023) The effects of high-speed rail on accessibility and
equity: evidence from the Turin-Lyon case-study. Socioecon Plann Sci 85:101379. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.seps.2022.101379
7. Camagni R (2009) Per un concetto di capitale territoriale. In: Borri D, Ferlaino F (eds) Crescita
e sviluppo regionale: Strumenti, sistemi, azioni. Franco Angeli, Milano, pp 66–90
8. Camagni R (2012) Principi di economia urbana e territoriale. Carocci, Roma
9. Camagni R (2019) Redistribuzione della rendita urbana: teoria e attualita. In: Baioni M, Caudo
G, Vazzoler N (eds) Rendita urbana e redistribuzione. Franco Angeli, Milano, p 3
10. Camagni R, Capello R, Caragliu A (2021) Le città metropolitane: leader all’interno della
gerarchia urbana in Italia? Archivio di Studi Urbani e Regionali 132:121–152. https://doi.org/
10.3280/ASUR2021-132006
11. Capello R (2014) Smart specialisation strategy and the new EU cohesion policy reform:
introductory remarks. Sci Reg 1:5–13. https://doi.org/10.3280/SCRE2014-001001
12. Cappelin R, Ferlaino F, Rizzi P (2012) La città nell’economia della conoscenza. In: Cappelin
R, Ferlaino F, Rizzi P (eds) Le città nell’economia della conoscenza. Franco Angeli, Milano,
pp 7–28
13. Colomb C, Gallent N (2022) Post-COVID-19 mobilities and the housing crisis in European
urban and rural destinations. Policy challenges and research agenda. Plann Pract Res 37(5):624–
641. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2022.2119512
14. Comitato Interministeriale per le Politiche Pubbliche (CIPU) (2013) Metodi e Contenuti sulle
Priorità in tema di Agenda Urbana. Roma
15. Compagnucci F (2013) Manifattura ed attività della conoscenza nelle città: L’alleanza neces-
saria. Imprese & Città, Rivista della Camera di Commercio di Milano 1:51–58. https://doi.org/
10.13140/RG.2.2.17348.58244
16. Coppola A, Del Fabbro M, Lanzani A, Pessina G, Zanfi F (2021) Ricomporre i divari. Politiche
e progetti territoriali contro le disuguaglianze e per la transizione ecologica. Il Mulino, Bologna
17. Cotella G, Berisha E (2022) Tackling the COVID-19 pandemic at the metropolitan level.
Evidence from Europe. In: Calabrò F, Della Spina L, Piñeira Mantiñán MJ (eds) New
metropolitan perspectives. Springer, Cham, pp 999–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-
06825-6_95
18. Cremaschi M, Besana A, Salone C (2021) Densità urbana e Covid-19: La diffusione territoriale
del virus nell’area di Bergamo. Archivio di Studi Urbani e Regionali 131:5–31. https://doi.org/
10.3280/ASUR2021-131001
19. De Toro P, Nocca F, Buglione F (2021) Real estate market responses to the COVID-19 crisis:
which prospects for the metropolitan area of Naples (Italy)? Urban Sci 5(1):23. https://doi.org/
10.3390/urbansci5010023
20. Fabbris L (1997) Statistica multivariata: Analisi esplorativa dei dati. McGraw-Hill, Milano
21. Fanfani R, Mazzocchi M (1999) I metodi statistici per l’analisi dei sistemi agricoli territoriali.
Quaderni di Dipartimento, 42. Università degli studi di Bologna, Bologna. https://doi.org/10.
6092/unibo/amsacta/2251
22. Feldman MP, Audretsch DB (1999) Innovation in cities: science-based diversity, specialization
and localized competition. Eur Econ Rev 43(2):409–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-292
1(98)00047-6
23. Florida R (2002) The rise of the creative class. Basic Books, New York
24. Florida R, Adler P, King K, Mellander C (2020) The city as startup machine: the urban under-
pinnings of modern entrepreneurship. In: Naveed Iftikhar M, Justice JB, Audretsch DB (eds)
Urban studies and entrepreneurship. Springer, Cham, pp 19–30. ISBN: 3030151638
25. Florida R, King KM (2018) Urban start-up districts: mapping venture capital and start-up
activity across ZIP codes. Econ Dev Q 32(2):99–118
26. Florida R, Mellander C, Ritchie I (2016) The geography of the global super-rich. Cities 88:112–
124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.01.004
27. Forte C, dè Rossi B (1979) Principi di Economia ed Estimo. ETAS, Milano
28. Gambarotto F, Leoncini R, Pedrini G (2018) Nuove prospettive per la manifattura Urbana. Sci
Reg 8(4):3110. ISSN: 2239-3110
The Great Concentration. Demography, Economy, Real Estate Values … 147

29. Glaeser E (2013) Triumph of the city: how our greatest invention makes us richer, smarter,
greener, healthier, and happier. Penguin, Los Angeles
30. Glaeser EL (1998) Are cities dying? J Econ Perspect 12(2):139–160. https://doi.org/10.1257/
jep.12.2.139
31. González JE, Krarti M (2021) Reflecting on impacts of COVID19 on sustainable buildings and
cities. ASME J Eng Sustain Build Cities 2(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4050374
32. Guerra L, Robles V, Bielza C, Larrañaga P (2012) A comparison of clustering quality indices
using outliers and noise. Intell Data Anal 16(4):703–715. https://doi.org/10.3233/IDA-2012-
0545
33. Hall S, Burdett R, Burdett R (2017) The SAGE handbook of the 21st century city. Sage,
Newbury Park
34. Hidalgo CA, Balland P-A, Boschma R, Delgado M, Feldman M, Frenken K, Glaeser E, He
C, Kogler DF, Morrison A (2018) The principle of relatedness. In: Morale AJ, Gershenson C,
Braha D, Minai AA, Bar-Yam Y (eds) Unifying themes in complex systems. Springer, Cham,
pp 451–457
35. Intesa San Paolo (2018) Economia e finanza dei distretti industriali. Intesa San Paolo Studi
e Ricerche. https://group.intesasanpaolo.com/content/dam/portalgroup/repositorydocumenti/
public/Contenuti/RISORSE/Documenti%20PDF/PDF_sepa/CNT-05-00000004FDF04.pdf
36. Iraldo F, Melis M, Pretner G (2014) Large-scale events and sustainability: the case of the
universal exposition Expo Milan 2015. Econ Policy Energy Environ 3:139–165. https://doi.
org/10.3280/EFE2014-003008
37. Leonzio F (2022) Città metropolitane: Attualità e prospettive sul piano amministrativo e
finanziario. Federalismi.it. https://cris.unibo.it/handle/11585/917582
38. Longo A, Cicirello L (2016) Città metropolitane e pianificazione di area vasta. Prospettive di
governo territoriale per la gestione delle metamorfosi urbane: prospettive di governo territoriale
per la gestione delle metamorfosi urbane. Franco Angeli, Milano
39. Lucatelli S (2015) La strategia nazionale, il riconoscimento delle aree interne. Territorio
74(2015):80–86. https://doi.org/10.3280/TR2015-074014
40. MacQueen J (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations.
In: Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability,
vol 1, pp 281–297
41. Mangialardo A, Micelli E (2021) Who drives the growth? Empirical evidences from real-estate
market values of 12 Italian metropolitan cities. In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della Spina L
(eds) New metropolitan perspectives. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 1023–1031.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48279-4_96
42. Marconi G (2022) Immigrazione e welfare locale nelle città metropolitane: Bari - Milano -
Napoli - Torino - Venezia. Franco Angeli, Milano
43. Micelli E, Pellegrini P (2021) Dynamics of Italian historical centres and new territorial
hierarchies. Territorio 94:7–20. https://doi.org/10.3280/TR2020-094001
44. Micelli E, Righetto E (2023) How do metropolitan cities evolve after the 2008/2012 crisis
and the Covid-19 pandemic? An analysis from real estate market values. Valori e Valutazioni
31:49–67. https://doi.org/10.48264/VVSIEV-20223105
45. Mirabile M, Militello E (2022) South working: Per un futuro sostenibile del lavoro agile in
Italia. Donzelli, Roma
46. Moretti E (2012) The new geography of jobs. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston
47. Naccari Carlizzi D, Quattrone A (2020) Città metropolitane e trasformazione digitale: Analisi
delle politiche e metodologia di valutazione. LaborEst 21:47–54
48. Nieuwenhuijsen MJ (2021) New urban models for more sustainable, liveable and healthier cities
post covid19; reducing air pollution, noise and heat island effects and increasing green space
and physical activity. Environ Int 157:106850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106850
49. Owen D (2010) Green metropolis: why living smaller, living closer, and driving less are the
keys to sustainability. Riverhead Books, Los Angeles
50. Rastvortseva S, Manaeva I (2022) Modern development of small and medium-sized cities:
trends and drivers. Econ Soc Changes Facts, Trends, Forecast 15(1):110–127. https://doi.org/
10.15838/esc.2022.1.79.6
148 E. Micelli and E. Righetto

51. Regione Emilia Romagna (2022) Scenari previsionali settoriali dell’Emilia-Romagna.

Imprese. https://imprese.regione.emilia-romagna.it/notizie/notizie-attualita/2022/leconomia-
dellemilia-romagna-da-qui-al-2024
52. Rodríguez-Pose A (2018) Commentary the revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what
to do about it). Camb J Reg Econ Soc 11(1):189–209. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsx024
53. Rosés JR, Wolf N (2018) Regional economic development in Europe, 1900–2010: a description
of the patterns. Econ Dev Europe’s Reg 3–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsx024
54. Scaffidi F (2022) Pandemic, fear and social innovation. In: Calabrò F, Della Spina L, Pineira
Mantinan MJ (eds) New metropolitan perspectives: post COVID dynamics: green and digital
transition, between metropolitan and return to villages perspectives. Springer, Cham, pp 494–
500
55. Tajani F, Liddo FD, Guarini MR, Ranieri R, Anelli D (2021) An assessment methodology
for the evaluation of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Italian housing market
demand. Buildings 11(12):592. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11120592
56. Tricarico L, De Vidovich L (2021) Proximity and post-COVID-19 urban development: reflec-
tions from Milan, Italy. J Urban Manag 10(3):302–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2021.
03.005
57. United Nations, Department of economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2018) The
world’s cities in 2018 – data booklet. https://doi.org/10.18356/8519891f-en
58. Ventura V, Giuffrida S (2016) Strategic planning in the old towns’ preservations. A valuation-
generative pattern for the urban fabric rehabilitations. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 223:271–276
59. Wagner M, Growe A (2021) Research on small and medium-sized towns: framing a new field
of inquiry. World 2(1):105–126. https://doi.org/10.3390/world2010008
The Evaluation of Urban Commons,
a Few Theoretical-Methodological
Considerations

Vincenzo Bentivegna and Marta Berni

Abstract The role of urban commons is an issue of growing concern for all those
involved in the re/generation of our cities, from both a theoretical and an opera-
tional point of view. However, their evaluation does not seem to have received equal
attention to that for economic and environmental issues. This article, adopting a
theoretical-methodological perspective, investigates the possibility to evaluate the
effects that architectural and urban projects have on the quality of urban commons
and which kind of evaluative approach should be suitable. After a short introduction,
the contributors face and specify the question of which are the distinctive character-
istics of common goods, and significantly their relational nature. This is followed by
an explanation of a community-based concept of urban commons which requires a
commonly shared governance model and a new evaluation approach. The further step
argues the need to define the “value content” of urban commons according to their
communitarian-relational nature. This means that their value does not merely depend
on technical-functional and economical aspects, but must consider their community-
relational quality and consequently the adoption of collaborative decision-making
and governance. In this context, the contributors suggest an evaluation approach that
should be firstly, open to the participation of all stakeholders (the community, the
“professional authors”, local government, etc.); secondly, able to grasp the commu-
nity aspects; and thirdly, build spaces for dialogue and relationship between all the
actors in the search for shared solutions.

Keywords Urban · Commons · Architectural and urban planning interventions ·

Evaluation · Communitarian value

V. Bentivegna · M. Berni (B)

Department of Architecture (DIDA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 149
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_11
150 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

1 Introduction

The urban commons are an issue of growing theoretical and practical-operational

concern. This is evidenced by the rich (economic, legal, social) literature1 and by
increasing practical experience of shared governance; demonstrated through “collab-
orative agreements” and “regulations for shared governance, regeneration and care
of commons” (to date in Italy, almost 250 municipalities have issued this type of
regulation).
The contributors share the view that the safeguarding and reproduction of the
urban commons is a fundamental requisite for the maintenance and expansion of the
quality of social, political and cultural life in healthy communities. This means that
the relational quality of urban spaces and the city as a whole become of as much a
concern as the ecological and environmental quality that they present.
The theoretical-methodological approach adopted is intended to stimulate a reflec-
tion on the evaluation approach that is more suited to tackle the potential effects that
architectural and urban projects may have on urban commons. The argument is
developed as follows. The second section is dedicated to underline the distinctive
characteristics of common goods with a special focus on their relational nature. The
third section deals with a specific kind of commons: urban commons which ask for
community-based decision-making, a commonly shared governance model and a
new evaluation approach. The further step (fourth section) argues the need to define
the “value content” of urban commons according to their communitarian-relational
nature.
Given the complexity of the decision-making and the diversity of the actors
involved, ranging across the so-called “authors” (i.e. promoters, politicians, public
administrators, technicians, designers, implementers, etc.), to the whole “commu-
nity” (i.e. individuals and/or organized citizens), the evaluation should not only
consider the technical aspects of the project (as financial, economic, environmental
and institutional evaluations usefully do), but might also adopt a community approach
and be open to the participation of citizens.
In this context, the fifth section suggests an evaluation approach firstly, open to
the participation of all stakeholders (the community, the “professional authors”, local
government, etc.); secondly, able to grasp the community aspects; and thirdly, build
spaces for dialogue and relationship between all the actors in the search for shared
solutions. In other words, an evaluation process that aims to provide all the actors
with a common and shared base of knowledge enabling them, to identify benefits
accruing from the existing commons that might otherwise be taken for granted and
overlooked by some actors. In this way, it is possible to make an actual compar-
ison and dialogue among the different views and the expression of a rationally and
scientifically supported judgement on the project choices that affect the common
goods.

1 EVEN a quick search on the internet provides hundreds of results, many of which include inter-
esting bibliographical references (see, for example, [7, 8, 10, 16, 21, 23]). An up-to-date bibliography
from the economic point of view is available in Salustri [20] and [1].
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 151

2 The Concept of Common Goods

According to the Rodotà Commission (appointed by the Italian Ministry of Justice

on June 21 2007), the common goods (or commons) are the «goods functional to
exercise fundamental rights and the free development of the person» [18]. Therefore,
they include those material and immaterial resources which, by their nature, have
a special relationship with the people who use them and that can be considered a
collective heritage of humanity. The Commission, identify that they represent a “new
fundamental category” of goods besides those of public and private property, perhaps
even a new “institutional structure” that poses “a challenge to the alliance between
private property and the state”.
Common goods, traditionally, encompass the natural resources necessary for the
maintenance and reproduction of life (water, air, climate, fertility, biodiversity, etc.),
but recently other categories have entered the list. The most relevant are artificial
“human” goods, i.e., all those material or immaterial goods on which depends the
maintenance of democratic social order, well-being of people, and full development
of the human qualities essential to “person flowering” that is, the real heart of “happi-
ness”, the only value you must measure to test the real well-being of the community
[22].
Although the commons are too variable (due to the range of cultural values,
societal difference and local nature etc.) to be captured in a comprehensive definition
or as a fixed, universal set of principles, it may be useful to try to identify their features
as follows:
(a) material goods (water, natural resources, but also goods such as the environment
and the artistic and cultural-historical heritage that have a material substrate);
(b) immaterial goods (the manifestations of man’s higher faculties such as language,
information, knowledge, culture, art, intellectual creations, images, traditional
knowledge, popular traditions, etc.);
(c) institutions providing services subject to social rights (e.g. access to electricity,
mobility, health services, communications, etc.);
(d) places, remarkably, the city and urban spaces;
(e) complexes of institutions and their political relations.
From this, it can be seen that common goods are all the essential ingredients,
which if denied deprive the citizen of the fundamental components of her/his rights
as a human being.
Therefore, common goods are those resources that belong to the people as a matter
of life necessity. Consequently, everybody has a moral if not legal interest in the right
to an equal share, and should be empowered by law to claim equal and direct access to
them. Citizens and user communities are the “primary stakeholders”, so the commons
should be managed for the benefit of all and this means it is impossible to apply to
them neither the private nor the public property regime. The most suitable regime
152 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

for commons is commonality or cooperation,2 because the survival and wellbeing of

each person depend on relationships he/she has with others, both in the community
and the environment.
Like legal disciplines, mainstream economic theory also distinguishes private
from public goods on the grounds of the presence/absence of two fundamental cate-
gories: excludability and rivalry in consumption. Thus, as shown by the classification
proposed by Ostrom [19], private goods are simultaneously rival and excludable, and,
conversely, public goods are non-excludable and non-rival. Collective goods (club
goods) are excludable, but not rivals.
Common goods are characterised by being “non-excludable” and “rival” in
consumption. And moreover, everyone receives an advantage from using them, that
cannot be separated from the advantage (or disadvantage) received by other people.
In other words, common goods exist only in terms of the common shared actions,
freely undertaken, that create them. By contrast, the use of public goods does not
imply that there is any relationship between subjects: it comes from choices made
independently in isolation.
This means that between commons and community there is a qualitative relation-
ship whereby one is constitutive of the other and vice versa, so that all the commons
should be conceived «as social systems consisting of communities and resources
managed in common» (Marella [15], p. 63). In other words, common goods are
basically “relational goods”, produced and enjoyed only in structured relationships
with others. As a consequence, any decision and/or action that diminish or damage
common goods harm the very people who consume and produce this good [9].
Thus identified, the common goods3 include all the open-access depletable and
rivalrous material resources (included the natural and the urban-territorial environ-
ment) whose use is unrestricted or unmanaged, and which allows free-rider behaviour
patterns. Where a system of market or government control is absent, the result is the
selfish use or misuse, the pursuit of individual interests and overconsumption of the
resource to the point of degrading or even depleting it, now widely described as the
“tragedy of the commons” [11].
The essential point is that the benefit(s) that the individual receives from the
commons occurs together with that to others, not against, as with private goods,
and not even regardless, as with public goods [24]. As a consequence, traditional
economic theory—adopting the individual perspective, in terms of preferences or

2 Remarkably Foster and Iaione [10, p. 307–8] argue: «… an urban resource … claimed and utilized
as a commons can be rooted in the “social function of property” principle found in many constitutions
around the world. … an owner cannot always do what she wants with her property; rather she is
obligated to make it productive, which may include putting it at the service of the community …
require individuals to sacrifice some property rights in order to put property to its productive and
socially functional use».
3 ACTUALLY, this identification of common goods does not encompass many types of open-

access resources (like language, information, knowledge, internet content, scientific literature, etc.)
in which increased use does not create rivalry but rather enhanced utility or value for the public. In
this case, instead of the “tragedy of the commons”, the network effect determines the “comedy (or
cornucopia) of the commons” that is: «more value is created as more people use the resource and
join the social community. The operative principle is “the more, the merrier”» (Bollier [6] p. 34).
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 153

choices—cannot capture common goods because it is unable to consider their

relational nature.
At the same time, in the face of the free-rider problem, it is impossible to rely
on the two organizational forms of management/governance theorized in the mid-
twentieth century: the market and the State. Neither the market’s regulatory prin-
ciple of “exchange of equivalents” (namely, an individual gives or does something
upon condition that he or she receives something else that is equivalent in value),
nor the public sector’s principle of “redistribution by command” (namely, a public
authority—the State—imposes the transfer of resources from one social group to
another to achieve its declared objectives) are effective [24].
The problem of the tragedy of the commons is a problem of failure of their
governance and of the allocation of rights of control.4 To solve it [19] proposed
a community-based solution arguing that the individual rationality of self-interest
should be replaced by that of the community. The community-based solution is
rooted in the principle of reciprocity which states that an individual gives or does
something for another individual to the extent that this person, in proportion to his
or her capacity, is able to give or do something for a third person (who could also
be the first individual): reciprocity therefore involves giving without losing anything
and receiving without taking anything away [23].
This means that the form of governance plays a crucial role and must be “com-
mon”. Neither a private nor a public governance of the common goods can ever
be effective. If the nature of the good is “common” the governance model must be
common as well. A common, shared governance means that all potential users can
(but not necessarily required to) participate in decisions about the way the good is
used or enjoyed.

3 Urban Commons

As literature largely recognizes, the urban environment, the city is the ultimate
common good. It is the collective resource, the priority physical space for the indi-
vidual and collective well-being, the living environment of human beings, the most
important ecosystem for the development of the human personality and the exercise
of the rights of citizenship.
The common good of the city is what citizens obtain by interacting among them-
selves and sharing the same physical and life-spaces. To the extent to which the
inhabitants work, move around, enjoy themselves, meet, and so on, they participate
in actions that are inevitably common and that contribute to the production of a
complex good, irreducibly common, which otherwise could not exist [9].

4 THE term tragedy used by Hardin [11], does not mean “irreparable damage” or ruin, but rather
a situation where one must face a social dilemma, that is a radical conflict between individual and
collective interest (see Zamagni [23]).
154 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

Nonetheless, it is not only the city in its entirety that is a common good, but
also all the fundamental services and structures required to support the human social
life and the urban spaces, including all those places (streets, squares, parks, public
gardens, etc.) where the inhabitants move around; meet; exchange; communicate;
trade; celebrate ceremonies and engage in social, cultural and political activities
[5]. But, according to [21], also other places of communal functions like kinder-
gartens, schools, health-care centres and hospitals, sports facilities and neighbour-
hood markets, being the result of struggles of the organizations of the working classes,
can be considered urban commons.
Despite the recent developments in technology and communications that have
promoted new forms of social life and interaction, urban commons still remain impor-
tant since they are the physical structure of the city that is, the places of collective and
community life. To a certain extent, the urban commons, represents the opposite of
Marc Augé’s notion of “non-lieu” [2]. The square is the urban space par excellence. It
is the place where the town’s main buildings overlook and the main meeting place of
the people. It represents the original site of public opinion and political participation.
Squares and urban spaces are places where people become citizens and members of
the community, it is where they meet one another, learn about “others”, share ideas,
exchange information and feelings, engage in discussion and participate important
events in the city. A city without squares and places used in common «is unthinkable,
like a body without a skeleton» (Salzano [21], p. 52).
The urban commons «satisfy several needs that come with living in a city because
they are functional to a community’s wellbeing, as well as to the individual exercise of
rights of citizenship» (Iaione [13], p. 172). In other words, urban commons represent
the “glue” of the local social community.
The “common” nature of urban commons stems neither from their “cultural rele-
vance”, nor from being owned by some public administrations, nor from particular
morphological characteristics, but from being relevant in the specific context as places
for social access and existential exchange.
It is not possible to separate an urban commons’ physical and social features. Any
urban common has both a technical and a socio-communitarian aspect. The technical
aspect mainly relates to the urban commons’ capacity to provide the physical structure
for the development of the urban social life. Urban commons represent the primary
physical space to ensure conditions of individual and collective well-being and the
exercise of the rights of citizenship. In fact, the quality of infrastructure, urban spaces
and services of common interest, that a city provides, immediately affect its inhabi-
tants’ quality of life and work; sociality; forms of interaction and sharing; sense of
community; mobility; entertainment and leisure; as well as the exercise of the rights
of citizenship and the possibility to cultivate abilities and passions.
The socio-communitarian aspect of urban commons relates to their social-
communitarian aspect, that is, to the actual performing of community activities.
«[T]he commons is socially produced—that is, it is created, used, preserved, and
managed by some collection of people» (Foster and Iaione [10], p. 307). The
community, using the territory, builds its “space of living”. The strong connection
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 155

between urban commons and a place’s identity, culture and traditions fosters social
relationships both inside the community and between people and the urban space.
Common goods only exist because they are part of a qualitative relationship with
one or more subjects (and not relating to acquisition and appropriation). In speaking
about commons «object and subject cannot be separated» (Iaione [12], p. 112). This
means that «You don’t have got a common good, you share in common good. You
cannot expect to “have got” a square, a public garden, a park, you can only aspire to
“be” active part of an urban ecosystem» (Mattei [17], p. 52).
Urban commons require that both the universal access and use and involvement
of community members (and anybody who’s heart is close to the urban commons
survival, care and conservation) in decisions and actions regarding them are guaran-
teed. Therefore, it is not possible to exclude certain groups of people from them and
«Institutions and civil society in alliance between them must be able to align in their
production and care» (Iaione [12], p. 111).
A model of communitarian governance of urban commons (or of the city as
commons) that is potentially successful is the cooperative multi-stakeholder model.
Such a model relies on the principle of “circular subsidiarity”, which, unlike vertical
and horizontal subsidiarity, does not require the transfer of sovereignty, but its sharing
[23].
According to the principle of circular subsidiarity, it is fundamental to system-
atically relate the three vertices of the triangle that represents the three spheres that
make up the whole society: the State (public bodies and/or agencies); the market
(business community); the civil society (organized groups). It is up to these three
spheres to adopt a collaborative model in order to prioritise interventions and the
concrete form of their governance.
Urban commons are open-access goods that produce an agglomeration of benefits
and other valuable social goods. Nonetheless, being finite resources, they are vulner-
able to rivalry and subject to over-use (either in volume or intensity), congestion
and exhaustion that degrade them (as is the case of parks, historical city centres,
squares, streets, etc.). This results in an urbanized version of the famous “tragedy of
the commons”.
The tragedy results from the myopic pursuit of individual interests. Under rational
behaviour, each person tends to increase his or her use of a common good without
taking account of the fact that this process will reduce its overall availability. The
result is an intensive and conflicting usage of the common good, which becomes
ever scarcer. Paradoxically, as the critical threshold is passed, the perception of
the imminence of the “tragedy” does not reverse but rather accelerates the rush to
stockpile, causing decay and congestion of the good to the point of destroying it [5].
The openness of urban commons, induces practices of appropriation, enclosure,
«dispossession and displacement from places of deep attachment and meaning for
residents» (Foster and Iaione [10], p. 301) and, at the same time, the subtraction of
collective resources from common usage and the transformation of urban spaces into
areas of consumption. According to Marella [14], this is how the transformation of
the citizen into a consumer—characteristic of neoliberal democracies—assumes a
concrete spatial dimension.
156 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

Unfortunately, the neoliberal approach to urban planning policies and market

control in urban redevelopment projects often lead toward the progressive impov-
erishment of urban common goods. In the past many urban renewal projects in
inner-city neighbourhoods not only physically displaced longstanding residents and
businesses from places that were used for free association and meeting, but also
damaged or destroyed vital social and cultural ties, disrupted the web of relation-
ships and cooperative action between people who shared both a network of everyday
public life and an urban space. The current most common forms of dispossession are
gated communities and gentrification.

4 How Does the Peculiar Nature of Urban Commons Affect

Their Evaluation?

As it emerges from the first part of this paper, urban commons are all those parts
of the of the city, all those places where communities develop their active collective
social life. Any decline in their quality determines the social and economic decay of
both local and whole city communities.
An architectural work or an urban space are urban commons not due to their
“technical quality”—that is their capacity to express collective utility—but to their
“relational quality”. The relational quality of a project or architectural work can
be defined as «the set of properties and attributes (physical, functional, technical,
economic, social, symbolic, cultural, etc.) of the architectural work that relate it
to social actors and that specify their “way of being” in that environment/context»
(Bentivegna [3], p. 26).
The relational quality of urban commons depends, on the one hand, on the commu-
nity use that citizens make of it. That is, a use aimed at satisfying a need that could
not be satisfied without joining the others. And on the other hand, on the recognition
of their functionality to the individual and collective well-being and exercise of rights
of citizenship. Consequently, urban commons cannot be the result of an exclusively
technical design founded on the mere professional competence of the designer. It
also requires that citizens recognize and accept their community-social function.
Therefore, an urban commons is a contingent and situational issue, that can be
gained but also lost, since it depends on social appreciation and recognition of the
social-community dimension of an architectural work or urban space. Such appreci-
ation is often identified with its governance and care. The value of urban commons—
collectively produced—results from human activity and is conditional on the capa-
bility of people to access, govern and use it. So, any evaluation of decisions, actions,
projects, interventions that affect urban commons should focus on their relational
quality.
Since any urban commons has both a technical (physical-territorial) and a socio-
communitarian dimension, its evaluation should consider them both. The technical
(physical-territorial) dimension relates to the capability to provide the physical
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 157

structure for the development of the urban social life. It is bound by decisions
and behaviours produced outside the decision-making process by the State and the
market. In this direction, what matters is the capability of the intervention to perform
the communitarian function. The mainstream evaluation mainly concerns the design,
production and management of buildings, urban spaces and services, infrastructures,
etc. Therefore, it is necessary to identify specific functional objectives of the actors
(organisationally coordinated) and develop the set of the related technical activities
that are of interest for those actors who govern and control the project and its imple-
mentation. This dimension concerns the “authors” of the physical interventions (i.e.
promoters, designers, implementers, etc. and the State as the responsible body and
regulator of public interests).
The socio-communitarian dimension of urban commons relates to the actual
performing of community activities. It is the community that, using the city, the
urban spaces, socially produces the urban commons and builds its space of living. In
this direction, what matters is mainly the governance of the urban commons. In this
case, the evaluation should adopt a community perspective to grasp the good endoge-
nous experience in which those goods are simultaneously generated and enjoyed.
This dimension is self-regulating and concerns the “community” (i.e. individuals or
organized citizens).
Both dimensions are essential to define the logical and operational boundaries
of urban commons production and governance and, therefore affect their evaluation.
Consequently, the evaluation is performed in two fields: the evaluation of the physical
structure of the urban commons and the evaluation of their communitarian-relational
constitutive aspects. These evaluations are distinct and autonomous, even over time.
Nonetheless, they are necessarily related and require some form of coordination when
the physical intervention affect the urban commons. That coordination can range
from a simple technical coordination to advanced, complex forms of collaboration
in both the evaluation and decision-making processes. The technical coordination
is implemented whenever the community produces and enjoys the urban commons
using an existing structure (by a reciprocal adaptation between community’s activities
and the structure), whereas a complex collaboration is needed when the intervention
design explicitly aims to perform community functions and foster the creation of
urban commons.

5 An Evaluation Approach for Urban Commons

Due to the communitarian-relational nature of the urban commons, the evaluation

must assume the point of view of the different categories of involved actors (“authors”
and “community”) and gives them equal dignity and relevance. The authors are a
group of individuals who organizationally cooperate with each other to carry out
the intervention. At the basis of their cooperation there is a contingent relationship
(defined by rules, contracts, agreements, etc.) limited in time and space. The “com-
munity” is a plural subject, having its own character and autonomous identity, which
158 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

cannot be reduced to the sum of the individual components and/or individuals who
make it up. Such identity is legitimized by the recognition of the value of commu-
nity in the spaces and places where this value is built and exercised. The commu-
nity continuously develops actions of governance and care of urban commons on a
community basis. Its members share reference frameworks, and interests, behaviours.
The nature of the two kinds of actors is different and difficult to harmonize. For
example, the private “authors”, among the different alternatives, choose according
to the criterion of maximum individual satisfaction. Yet this criterion is unsuitable
for a plural subject. Moreover, as [4] highlights, also the institutional evaluations
performed by Public Administrations are partisan in judging architectural-urban
projects.
Each pole (“authors” and “community”) judge from their point of view (depending
on different skills, interests, objectives and evaluative questions). The “authors” are
mainly interested in the physical-territorial dimension of the urban common good.
While for the “community” the relational-communitarian dimension is prevalent.
There is the need to identify a common space where the two categories of actors
mutually recognize their right to participate in the dialogue.
This common space of coordination stems from the interest of the two involved
actors for the positive values that the urban commons promotes and develops. It is
qualified by the concept of “communitarian value”. The communitarian value is a
peculiar kind of value that corresponds with the quality of the social, cultural, spiritual
political life of one or more communities. The communitarian value recognizes the
quality of social, political and cultural life as an autonomous value essential for the
existence and development of a healthy community. It, therefore, identifies a new
sphere of urban values, in addition to the already known technical, economic and
(more recent) environmental values. In other words, collective action generates the
communitarian value while the territorial structure provides the necessary functional
condition for the urban commons, i.e., the places and physical structures suitable for
the development of urban social-community life.
Consequently, different categories of actors evaluate the communitarian value
in different ways. According to the point of view of the “authors”, the communi-
tarian value has mainly physical-design aspects consequently the preferred approach
has always been the “offer” one according to which the “consumer” is a passive
person who “must” consume what the producer decides to provide. What matters
is the attitude of the intervention to enable, develop, stimulate the cultural, social,
political, spiritual life of the urban community. Therefore, it is definable in terms of
accessibility, ease of contact, stimulus of meetings, communications and dialogue,
etc.
Whereas, according to the point of view of the “community”, urban commons are
seen from the direction of what economists improperly and reductively call “demand-
side”. Indeed, the value of urban commons is created neither in production nor in
market exchange process, but in the use that members of a community make of
the physical structure of the urban commons. In the scene, the predominant actor
is the community not the “authors” (State, producers, dealers etc.). This means that
citizens should not be considered as passive consumers, but are active citizens asking
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 159

for social inclusion and participative policies, who are strongly interested in the
communitarian value of urban commons’ protection and preservation projects. Such
communitarian value mainly has relational-governance aspects since it is interpreted
as the urban commons’ capability to allow and guarantee: firstly, users’ equal and
free access and the absence of discrimination based on their identity and purchasing
power; and secondly, the possibility of achieving an organizational balance involving
all stakeholders. This implies the need to adopt a collaborative decision-making
approach to increase and deepen public participation in decision-making processes
that affect the quality of their living conditions.
In an urban collaborative democracy, the logic should be a collaborative one
based on the development of shared norms, goals and interests [10]. Citizens are
perceived as empowered members of a network of actors (inhabitants, stakeholders,
policymakers, local officials, professionals, promoters, designers, implementers,
controllers, etc.) participating in the collaborative decision-making and evaluation
of interventions affecting the urban environment. This requires the adoption of a
collaborative governance approach and an “urban collaborative democracy”.
Nevertheless, the collaborative governance approach raises two relevant concerns.
The first one is related to accountability and legitimacy. Unlike the traditional model
of representative democracy (where the decisions of the government are assumed
to represent the will of the people and governance arrangements are usually volun-
tary and therefore binding only those who are actually involved in the governance
scheme), in collaborative governance of urban commons the governance arrange-
ment may affect the everyday life not only of the inhabitants that fall within the
boundaries of the governance scheme but can have an impact also on those who are
not part of the governance. A second concern is related to social equality, that is:
whether the collaborative governance represents a significant step towards a more
egalitarian process than currently exists. In other words, whether it can guarantee
equal access by under-represented groups who are too often unable to access political
and larger decision-making processes [10].
Whereas deliberative democracy is held able to produce a reflexive change of
beliefs (through deliberation and transformation of citizens’ and their representa-
tives’ preferences) in the process of exchanging arguments; collaborative democracy
involves a different type of institutional complexity a re-symbolisation of the place
of power and thicker interaction than that provided by a network of actors or stake-
holders. That is an institutional platform where: the relationships among power, law,
and knowledge are re-defined. Instead of hierarchies of power and wildly unequal
bargaining positions, there are networks of empowered members. The inhabitants and
stakeholders are co-creating, co-designing, and co-implementing planning and other
public policy solutions for complex urban environments together with policymakers
and local officials [10]. As a consequence, the evaluation must be a collaborative
one.
Two considerations support this statement. First, the evaluation cannot be “addi-
tive”, its result should not be either a summative narrow economic index or the
compliance with the budgetary constraints of public administration. Facing the
commons, no trade-offs among the different actors’ good are allowed: one cannot
160 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

sacrifice the good of someone to increase that of someone else.5 Urban commons
evaluation requires a richer, more qualitative and humanistic set of criteria such as
moral legitimacy, social consensus and equity, transparency in decision making, and
ecological sustainability, among other concerns’ and founded on the “multiplication”
of the different components of the value.
Secondly, taking an active part in the decision-making process as well as in
the evaluation of projects concerning urban commons is part of their production
process. Therefore, the adoption of collaborative decision-making and evaluation
fosters a deeper public participation by providing collaborative arenas where under-
represented groups (who are too often unable to access political and larger decision-
making processes) have equal access. This collaborative environment does not only
endow citizens with the ability to protect the open “interaction space” (that makes
public spaces so valuable as urban commons), but it also gives everyone a real chance
to actively participate in public life, (independently of property rights), but implies
an empowerment process. That is, an increase in citizens’ capability to “master”
and influence more consciously the collective decision-making related to the prob-
lematic and complex situations affecting the urban commons. This requires the citi-
zens’ engagement in a learning process that enables them to think and reason “in
an evaluative way”, i.e. to examine the alternatives, to weigh their advantages and
disadvantages, to explain the values, objectives and to interpret the results.
Consequently, the evaluation should build up a collaborative structure between
the “authors” and the community in order to foster their collective communitarian
interaction. The main purpose should not be the expression of judgements on specific
aspects of the architectural-urban intervention, but the development of a fruitful and
efficient process of collaborative decision-making. This means a particular atten-
tion to languages, procedures and conditions for implementation to make decisions
operational and avoid endless delay.
The “communitarian value” is unique since it is linked to the system of actors (that
specific community and those specific “authors”) and to the peculiar situation and
context (at that moment and in that place) on which the significant elements for the
definition of the communitarian value depend. Therefore, it is necessary to abandon
some cornerstones of traditional evaluations (e.g. the maximization of individual
utility, based on preference satisfaction) and address issues such as the decision-
making interaction between subjects (with different cognitive structures, informa-
tion and knowledge—i.e. information asymmetries—behavioural logics, etc.); the
complexity (re to the uncertainty and instability) of the decision-making environment;
the impact of the policy; and the need to identify shared compromise solutions.
Therefore, the evaluation should enter, in one way or another, into the question
of governance, where the evaluator should play the role of a broker, the mediator
of knowledge. She/he has the task to encourage the mutual flow of information and

5 In other words, the summative logic (according to which the total sum may remain positive even
though some addendum decreases up to zero provided that such decrease is compensated by an
increase of some other addenda), should give way to a multiplicative one, according to which the
annulment of even a single factor cannot be compensated since it makes the entire product equal to
zero.
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 161

knowledge between the different actors and provide non-specialists with accessible
evaluation methods, techniques and languages.

6 A Few Conclusions

This article raises the issue of the specificity and autonomy of the evaluation of
urban commons. In our view, their peculiar aspects and features discourage the use
of standard evaluations normally used in the urban and architectural field. As a
matter of fact, the literature generally considers the commons as an autonomous
category, separate from both public and private goods due to their following specific
characteristics:
• their “communitarian dimension”, related to the relational quality which calls into
question the community use that citizens make of urban commons (as well as, the
recognition of their functionality to the individual and collective well-being and
exercise of rights of citizenship).
• their “technical dimension”, related to the technical quality, which calls into
question the urban commons’ capacity to express collective utility
In other words, the community use and the functionality to the individual and
collective well-being and exercise of rights of citizenship generate the communi-
tarian value; while the territorial structure provides the necessary functional condi-
tion for the urban commons, i.e., the places and physical structures suitable for the
development of urban social-community life.
Both dimensions (communitarian and technical) are essential to define the logical
and operational boundaries of urban commons production and governance and, there-
fore, evaluation. Consequently, the evaluation is performed in two fields: the eval-
uation of the physical structure of the urban commons and the evaluation of their
communitarian-relational constitutive aspects.
This raises the question of how to coordinate these two essential evaluation
approaches. The main problem is that they differ deeply from each other because
they refer to totally different categories of subject: on the one hand, the “authors”
of the physical-territorial intervention (promoters, planners, builders, etc., including
the State as manager and regulator of the public interest) and on the other hand, the
communities.
To evaluate urban commons, this article suggests adopting “community value”
as a reference/basis. The communitarian value is a peculiar kind of value that corre-
sponds with the quality of the social, cultural, spiritual political life of one or more
communities. The communitarian value recognizes these qualities as an autonomous
value, essential for the existence and development of a healthy community. It iden-
tifies a new sphere of urban values, in addition to the already known economic and
(more recent) environmental values. But this raises an issue of coordination because
the different categories of actors evaluate the communitarian value in different ways.
Consequently, in this context, it is necessary, as a procedural condition, a publicly
162 V. Bentivegna and M. Berni

supported and participated collaboration between all the evaluators (involved in the
different dimensions of evaluation). In this way, the evaluators are called to play the
role of knowledge mediators.
Of course, this article addresses only some initial issues arising from the eval-
uation of urban commons in accordance with their special nature. However, it
opens up several further areas of investigation, both methodological, normative and
operational.
From this last point of view, many cities recognising the growing importance of the
urban commons issue are experimenting with a variety of specialised interventions
and programmes to increase the quality of social and community life through urban
commons. These strategies will give room for the evaluation of the community value.
Moreover, they also suggest the need to support traditional evaluations of urban
transformations with a risk analysis of the pervasive effects they produce on the
quality of social and community life.

Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Prof. Steve Curwell for his critical suggestions on
preparing the manuscript.

References

1. Albareda L, Sison AJG (2020) Commons organizing: embedding common good and institutions
for collective action. Insights from ethics and economics. J Bus Ethics 166(4):727–743. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04580-8
2. Augé M (1992) Non-lieux: introduction a l’anthropologie de la surmodernite. Seuil, Paris
3. Bentivegna V (2019) The quality of the architectural works: the relational aspects. Valori e
Valutazioni 23:23–29
4. Bentivegna V (2018) The evaluation of structural-physical project in urban distressed areas.
In Mondini G et al. (eds), Integrated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities,
Springer International Publishing, pp 17–36
5. Berni M, Rossi R (2019) Considering the quality of projects in relation to the city as a common
good. Valori e Valutazioni 23:57–63
6. Bollier D (2011) The growth of the commons paradigm. In: Hess C, Ostrom E (eds)
Understanding knowledge as a commons. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 27–40
7. Bollier D, Helfrich S (eds) (2014) The wealth of the commons: a world beyond market and
state. Levellers Press
8. Boniburini I, Le Maire J, Moretto L, Smith H (Eds.) (2013) La ville comme bien commun: plan-
ification urbaine et droit à la ville. Les Cahiers d’architecture La Cambre-Horta N 9 (ULB) &
La Lettre Volee, pp 44–61
9. Deneulin S, Townsend N (2007) Public goods, global public goods and the common good. Int
J Soc Econ 34(1/2):19–36
10. Foster SR, Iaione C (2015) The city as a commons. Yale Law Policy Rev 34:281–349
11. Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248
12. Iaione C (2012) City as a commons. In: Design and dynamics of institutions for collective
action: a tribute to Prof. Elinor Ostrom–II Thematic Conference of the IASC, Utrecht (vol 29),
pp 109–151
13. Iaione C (2015) Governing the urban commons. Italian J Public Law 7(1):170–221
14. Marella MR (2015) Lo spazio urbano come bene comune. Scienze del territorio 3:78–87
The Evaluation of Urban Commons, a Few Theoretical-Methodological … 163

15. Marella MR (2017) The commons as a legal concept. Law Critique 28(1):61–86
16. Marella M R (a cura di) (2012) Oltre il pubblico e il privato. Per un diritto dei beni comuni.
Ombre Corte, Verona
17. Mattei U (2011) Beni comuni. Un manifesto. Laterza, Roma-Bari
18. Ministero della Giustizia, Relazione della Commissione Rodotà per la modifica delle norme
del codice civile in materia di beni pubblici (14 giugno 2007). https://www.giustizia.it/giusti
zia/it/mg_1_12_1.wp?facetNode_1=3_1&facetNode_3=0_10_21&facetNode_2=0_10&pre
visiousPage=mg_1_12&contentId=SPS47617
19. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action.
Cambridge University Press, New York
20. Salustri A (2020) Social and solidarity economy and social and solidarity commons: Towards
the (re)discovery of an ethic of the common good? Ann Public Cooperat Econ 92(1):13–32
21. Salzano E (2007) The city as a common good: building the future drawing from our history. In:
Boniburini I, Le Maire J, Moretto L, Smith H (Eds.) (2013) La ville comme bien commun: plan-
ification urbaine et droit à la ville. Les Cahiers d’architecture La Cambre-Horta N 9 (ULB) &
La Lettre Volee, pp 44–61
22. Sen A (2008) The economics of happiness and capability. In Bruni L, Comim F, Pugno M
(Eds.) (2008). Capabilities and happiness. Oxford University Press
23. Zamagni S (2015) Beni comuni e economia civile. http://www.castelmonteonlus.it/UserFiles/
File/BENI-COMUNI-E-ECONOMIA-CIVILE_zamagni.pdf
24. Zamagni S (2018) Beni comuni territoriali e economia civile. Scienze del Territorio 6:50–59
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between
Intergenerational Solidarity
and Economic Feasibility

Grazia Napoli

Abstract Economic evaluation of public investments implies the responsibility of

choosing how to use public resources to achieve maximum social well-being. Does
pursuing the goal of public economic efficiency always guarantee intergenerational
solidarity? And, conversely, can the pursuit of broad solidarity damage the commu-
nity in terms of sub-optimal use of resources? The Social Discount Rate plays a
strategic role in the evaluation of public investments, as it may influence, or even
overturn, the resulting value of various indicators of economic feasibility, such as
Net Present Value. Moreover, the choice of the Social Discount Rate reveals whether
and to what extent political institutions make public investments in accordance with
the fair use of natural resources and the preservation of cultural heritage that will
be left to future generations. This paper aims to highlight the effect that the polit-
ical decision to set a particular Social Discount Rate would have on the economic
feasibility of investments in energy retrofitting of public buildings located in contexts
subject to historical or landscape constraints. A case study is analyzed in terms of Net
Present Values assessed according to different Social Discount Rate that are set in a
few selected Italian regions and European countries. As the results are divergent, it
would be advisable to relaunch the scientific debate on the Social discount rate in Italy
and the responsibilities of administrative and political bodies in translating theoret-
ical approaches into clear and consensual protocols and rules for setting the Social
Discount Rate to eliminate discretionary power that creates social and territorial
inequalities.

Keywords Social discount rate · Intergenerational equity · Public investment

evaluation · Economic feasibility · Energy retrofit

G. Napoli (B)
Department of Architecture, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 165
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_12
166 G. Napoli

1 Introduction

Each investment has its own time and monetary shape of costs and benefits, i.e. the
distribution over time of costs and benefits, and a peculiar elasticity of Net Present
Value (NPV) to Social Discount Rate (SDR). Especially in long-term public projects
where natural, energy and cultural resources are used whose effects will greatly
affect future generations, the choice of the SDR can influence both absolute economic
feasibility (accepted or rejected investment) and relative economic feasibility (change
in ranking due to different elasticity of NPV to SDR).
The Social Discount Rate has been the subject of scientific, economic and political
debate for many years, as it contributes to determining the economic feasibility of
public investments according to various authors and government guidelines by Euro-
pean Commission and HM Treasury of Great Britain [10, 19, 35, 41]. Furthermore,
the SDR is not only a technical–economic element related to the efficient use of
public resources, but also plays an ethical role in intergenerational equity [8]. In fact,
the value of the SDR largely depends on the choice of theoretical approach adopted,
as well as how the principle of distributive equity between generations in a given
place is determined. Intergenerational equity is inherent in caring for future genera-
tions and distributing the planet’s natural resources to present and future generations.
This principle is rooted to the well-known statement of the Brundtland Report on
Sustainable Development [40] and agenda of the Rio “Earth Summit” [38], as well as
many other successive United Nations Conferences. As it is reported by Spackman
[35], several and opposite approaches, such as the Social Opportunity Cost (SOC)
and the Social Time Preference (STP), and numerous rules of thumb have been
proposed to quantify the SDR, which may be set at high, low, fixed or declining
values or, indeed, even at zero value if the no discounting theory is followed [8]. The
Declining Discount Rate (DDR) is proposed in the Green Book by the HM [19] and
[42] according to the assumption that when the discount rate itself is uncertain in
the future, it implies that the effective Discount Rate (DR) declines over time to its
lowest possible value, and the most eminent scholars from the USA, UK, Sweden,
Netherlands all agreed with adopting these approach [1].
As climate change is a global issue and strong international collective actions are
required [36], the United Nation proposed 17 Sustainable Global Goals (SDGs) in
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [39]. In the field of energy policy,
the European Commission has launches a strategy to greening European cities also
through energy retrofitting measures for districts [2, 3, 12] and buildings [24, 26]
that contribute to reduce primary energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions
(GHG). Assessing climate-change policy, as well as the economic feasibility of such
projects through the Net Present Value (NPV), necessary implies the choice of a
SDR. The value of the SDR fluctuates, however, depending on the country in which
the investment is made, since each government has adopted different economic and
ethical theoretical paradigms and has proposed specific pragmatic rules in order to
assess the level of the SDR. In Italy, in particular, the absence of national rules and
clear procedures results in a situation in which the discretionary powers of local
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 167

authorities on the setting of the SDR prevail to such an extent that the economic
feasibility of a significant proportion of energy retrofitting measures varies widely
within the country, and the corresponding divergence in public decisions to invest
can lead towards economic inefficiency and social inequity.
There are also some studies about the effects of use different discounting rates in
public investments within the same country as a consequence of the fact that laws
do not regulate any protocol to set the SDR. For example, [15] demonstrate the
influence of the SDR on the competition between different renewable technologies,
while Hansson shows that the same project could be rejected or accepted depending
on the Swedish agency that examines it [17].
The aim of this study is to analyze the effect that the political decision to set
the SDR has on the economic feasibility of energy retrofitting measures for public
buildings, especially in the case in which the economic feasibility is weak and the
buildings are located in contexts subject to historical or landscape constraints. A case
study, consisting of six energy retrofitting measures, has been analyzed and the NPVs
assessed by applying varying discount rates according to those set in a few selected
Italian regions and, also, in certain European countries. The comparison of the results
allows us to measure the extent of variation in public investment decisions among
countries caused by the absence of a path of policy choice rooted in a theoretical
approach. In order to examine the interconnection between SDR, energy retrofitting
measures and cultural and landscape contexts, some considerations are made on
whether SDRs take into account the fact that energy retrofitting not only relates
to climate change and the use of resources, but also to the quality of local cultural,
landscape, and natural heritage that are all key elements in determining the identity of
the current generation as well as being the legacy that will be left to future generations.
The paper has the following structure: the next section describes the most common
paradigms and pragmatic approaches to define and evaluate social time discounting.
The third section examines the results and highlights the concerns rising from a case
study. Finally, possible future developments of the research are discussed.

2 Paradigms and Pragmatic Approaches of Social Time

Discounting

Social discount rate is applied in public investment evaluations, e.g. the Cost–Benefit
Analysis (CBA), to compare public spending with future consumption through the
discount coefficient (DC), as the coefficient (1) converts each cost or benefit that
arises at different times into a present value.

1
DC = (1)
(1 + SDR)n

where SDR is the social discount rate; n is the future year.

168 G. Napoli

Different approaches have been debating over many decades by academic and
political institutions and these have a strong political impact, since governmental
reports and guidelines transform them into operative methods that are then applied to
public and private decision process in many sectors, including climate-change policy
and the evaluation of energy-efficiency measures. In terms of basic rationale, the two
most common approaches taken are named Social Opportunity Cost and Social Time
Preference, each of which is founded on different and diverging premises.

2.1 The Social Opportunity Cost Approach

The Social Opportunity Cost approach requires that the rate of return for public
investments should be greater, or at least equal, to the rate of return for investments
made in the private sector and in a competitive market, for example in the financial
markets. This approach highlights the fact that spending on public investments that
have low rates of marginal productivity sacrifices alternative private investments that
could yield higher rates of return.
According to ([7], p. 3) «the discount rate should be consistent with choosing a
project that is more productive over another that is less productive. The rate then
must cover the productivity that is forgone as a consequence of displaced investment
and the net-of-tax supply price of the newly induced savings and the marginal cost
of incremental foreign funding».
Public fundraising has an effect on the economic system, consequently the SOC
should take into account the Opportunity Cost of Public Funding (OCPF). The OCPF
is evaluated as a rate of return, implies the need both to quantify the flow of lost
consumption (the relation between the lost consumption growth rate and the national
economy rate) and to establish whether the OCPF is constant over time. Moreover, the
SOC rate regards the implications in microeconomic analysis of the macroeconomic
mechanism of public finance, since public investments are primarily funded through
borrowing or taxation. This issue implies determining whether the marginal social
cost of extra taxation is different from that of extra borrowing, even if this hypothetical
difference is considered not significant since it is more an issue of macroeconomic
policy than of microeconomic analysis [35].
With regard to the categories of risks that public sector faces, non-project specific
risks, such as global catastrophe, are implicitly included in SOC rates, whereas
project-specific or institution-specific risks in estimation of costs or demand should
be better expressed in sensitivity analysis.
Since the SOC approach applies the principle of welfare economics, the SDR is
consequently derived from market data, with the corresponding market distortions or
failures, such as the myopic behavior of the private sector, asymmetric information,
and large market fluctuations (Fig. 1). This approach tends, therefore, to estimate a
high SDR due to the externalities and the inclusion of a risk premium. Moreover, the
linking of the SDR to private sector productivity is inappropriate, since investment in
the private sector is, in most cases, not a feasible option for public administrations [5].
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 169

Fig. 1 Social opportunity

cost features

As a result, the social opportunity cost approach may not be appropriate to discount
very long-term public investment, especially when they regard equity across different
generations.

2.2 The Social Time Preference Approach

The Social Time Preference Rate (STPR) is the rate at which society values the
present compared to the future or, in other words, is about assessing cost and benefits
for the society rather than for individuals.
The Social Time Preference approach is based on the comparison between the
declining of welfare from marginal income with the future marginal income and
how much the current population cares about future population marginal welfare
[35]. This approach does not give too much weight to the Opportunity Cost of Public
Fund OCPF, which is not evaluated as a rate of return, but rather as a flow of future
lost consumption in terms of discounted present value, with the constraint that the
increasing rate of the flow has to be lower than the expected growth rate of the
national economy.
Once problems of climate change began to be noted, the need for a very long-term
policy emerged and tended towards the use of STP approach. The focus of debate
in the literature is on the quantification of the STPR, although the method used to
obtain this may be either descriptive (i.e. utilizing market data) [30] or prescriptive
(i.e. related to an ethically appropriate discount rate) [36]. Freeman and Groom [14]
have point out that the STPR is usually estimated by the return of holding government
bonds or by the Ramsey growth model [33], assuming that the social rate measures
societies’ willingness to postpone the current social consumption in exchange for
future consumption.
In the Ramsey’s formulas (2) and (3), the STPR consists of two components,
namely ‘time preference’ and ‘wealth effect’. The STPR is related to the so-called
‘pure time preference’, does not include any economic risk but the catastrophic risk,
and includes both the marginal utility and the expected growth rates of consumption.

STPR = ρ + (μ ∗ g) (2)
170 G. Napoli

STPR = (δ + L) + (μ ∗ g) (3)

where ρ is time preference, δ is pure time preference, L is catastrophic risk, μ is

marginal utility of consumption, g is expected growth rate per capita consumption.
According to another approach, the SDR for long-term investment is considered
declining over time (decades or centuries) to account the uncertainty [1, 19, 21, 42].
An opposite approach supports a no discounting policy, adopting a zero pure time
discount rate, on the basis of two arguments: more equity and best use [8].
With regard to the former, no discounting is supposed to achieve fair balance
between generations because it avoids any discrimination on the basis of someone’s
temporal location (i.e. date birth). To take intergenerational justice into account, the
notion is founded on seeing ourselves as representatives of humanity as a whole, and
on according the same equal status to all members of society, both present and future.
In economic terms, this assumption calls into question any pure time preference.
With regard to the latter, this approach reverses the very definition of the rational
use of resources by utilitarian, and assumes that if each generation uses a positive pure
time discount rate, this necessarily implies that each prior generation has overused
resources and compromised future generations, since overuse is suboptimal from the
point of view of a future generation [8].
However, other related issues that are still unresolved are what principle of
distributive justice should be applied between generations, and to what this principle
should refer (for example welfare, primary resources, etc.).
Some economists do not support the no discounting theory, but rather endorse a
positive discount rate, arguing that if average living standards are improving, then
growth discounting must be applied, since future generations will be wealthier than
the current generation. Others criticize this principle for many reasons, such as the
risk and uncertainty inherent in predicting future wealth, the difficulty of defining
average wealth on a global level, and the doubt surrounding a coherent meaning
of greater wealth in comparison to a corresponding level of welfare, for example,
when future wealthier generations have to face a worsening of the global climate [8].
Finally, other studies propose positive social time rate and discounting growth as a
means of deferring to future generations a part of investment costs and sacrifices made
by the current generation to provide for public wealth, even if this latter approach
also involves value judgements regarding intergenerational justice as well as absolute
and comparative standards of living. For example, [6] suggests to eliminate climate
externality by reducing the present emissions and financing the cost by loans that
will be repaid by future generations, whereas [34] argues that to ask to the present
generation to assume all the cost of mitigation of global warming is unfair and
politically unrealistic.
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 171

2.3 The Social Discount Rate

Various pragmatic approaches are proposed within different European countries to

estimate the Social Discount Rate. Despite the fact that the Guide to Cost–Benefit
Analysis by the European Union has set SDRs [10], each EU member country
has adopted its own discount approach and set the SDR that may have specific
features, such as setting a declining rate in order to achieve a greater balance between
generations [16] (Table 1).
The setting of the SDRs presents significant differences that are synthesized below.
The European Union Guide to Cost–Benefit Analysis of investment projects financed
by the European Structural and Investment Funds suggests two different SDRs as
benchmark figures, namely 5.5% for the Cohesion countries and 3.5% for the others.
In the Impact Assessment for the 2030 energy and climate policy framework
for energy, the European Commission [11] assumed a discount rate for service
offering high potential for energy performance contracting equal to 10% in 2020
and decreasing over subsequent years. Using such a high discount rate implies that
the renovation of a building is assessed to be very risky in comparison to other invest-
ments and indirectly favors fossil-fuel based technologies over clean technologies
because it places little emphasis on future costs and benefits. In fact, the higher the
discount rate, the lower the value a social system assigns to future savings, so high
energy-efficiency investments became less attractive.
In United Kingdom, the Green Book by HM [18, 19], which provides govern-
mental guidance on appraisal and evaluation, has adopted the Ramsey’s model and a
declining SDR. The latest edition in 2018 has set STPR at 3.5%, and at 1.5% when
there is risk to life values. In more detail, pure time preference δ is 0.5%, catastrophic
risk L is 1%, marginal utility of consumption μ is 1, and expected growth rate per
capita consumption g is 2%. When an investment involves substantial wealth transfer
between generation, a reduced rate is applied to cost and benefit analysis. Since the
pure social time preference is excluded, the SDR is set at 3.0% and declines over the
long term until 0.86% (300 + years) (Fig. 2).
Ramsey’s model is also widely used in other European countries, such as France
and Germany, although the rates may be set at different values. The French govern-
ment uses an SDR of 4% to assess investment policy and assumes that the rate
declines to 2% beyond 30 years [9]. In Germany, most governmental studies use a

Table 1 Features of the discounting theory (author’s elaboration on data by Groom [16]
Discounting Theory
Country Rate approach Risk premium Declining rate Intergenerational rate
United SPTR (sensitivity analysis) Over time
Kingdom
USA SOC Equity risk Lower than benchmark
rates
Norway SOC Risk premium declining Over time
172 G. Napoli

Fig. 2 Declining
discounting rates 4%

3%

2%

1%

0%
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Francia United Kingdom

rate of 4%, and a range from 0 to 7.5% in the additional sensitivity analysis, whereas
in the 2030 Federal Transport Infrastructure Plan [13] the rate was set at 1.7%. The
Dutch General Guidelines for social cost–benefit analysis use real discount rates of
4% to 5.5% (2.5% free risk plus 3% for macroeconomic risk). In the USA, the federal
guidelines given by the Office of Management and Budget [31, 32] state that when
discounting intergenerational investments, the discount rate should be set at between
1 and 3%.

3 Economic Feasibility of a Case Study as an Opportunity

for Discussion

Theoretical and operational considerations on the political choice of the SDR to be

applied to the evaluation of public investments may be made starting from a case
study in the field of energy retrofitting projects. The case study relates to a call
for tender, by Unione Province Italiane UPI, of energy audit and energy retrofitting
measures for public buildings located in some southern Italian regions and in areas
where constraints, such as those of the Landscape Territorial Plans, have been often
put in place to protect architectural, landscape and environmental quality.
The economic feasibility of the energy retrofitting measures was assessed through
the NPV formula (4) and according to the constraint (5), i.e. NPV greater than zero.
Afterwards, these assessments were supplemented by a study on the efficiency of
public incentives [23, 25].

n
(Rt − Ct )
NPV = −C 0 + (4)
t=1
(1 + SDR)t

NPV > 0 (5)

Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 173

where Rt is the revenue for the year t; C 0 is the investment cost; C t is the cost for the
year t; SDR the social discount rate; and n the number of years of the time frame of
the analysis.
It is important to point out that, in the absence of national rules or a stated protocol
in the UPI’s contract notice, each regional report sets its own different discount rate
that varies significantly from one region to another, specifically 2.5% in Campania,
3% in Calabria, and 6.5% in Apulia without giving any explanation or justification.
The case of Apulia has been specifically analyzed because the energy retrofitting
measures are disadvantaged in the competition with the measures of the other regions
for obtaining public funding, due to the high SDR (the higher the SDR, the lower the
NPV). After ranking the energy retrofitting measures of Apulia in descending order
of NPV, the measures were sorted into four categories based on quartiles (Fig. 3). The
result is that nearly 25% of the retrofitting measures carried out in Apulia generate
weak-positive or weak-negative economic feasibility and belong to the categories B
and C, where the NPV ranges from + 35,000 Euros to -11,500 Euros (Fig. 4).
A sample which consists of six retrofitting measures (labelled as a, b, c, d, e, and f )
has been selected from all the measures belonging to categories B, C, and D. (Table 2).
Then, starting from the first cash flow analysis of the UPI report and a ceteris paribus
assumption (retrofitting measures, building characteristics, climate zone, prices, etc.,

Fig. 3 Quartiles of NPV and categories of retrofitting measures in Apulia (Italy) (Author’s
elaboration on UPI data)

Fig. 4 Categories of economic feasibility of retrofitting measures in Apulia (Italy) (Author’s

elaboration on UPI data)
174 G. Napoli

Table 2 Region and type of

Name Italian Region Type of retrofitting measure
retrofitting measures of the
sample a Apulia Opaque envelope insulation
b Calabria Opaque envelope insulation
c Campania Opaque envelope insulation
d Calabria Replacement transparent envelope
e Campania Replacement transparent envelope
f Apulia Replacement transparent envelope

all being equal), only the location in a country or region has been “virtually” changed
in order to identify the potential effects on the economic feasibility assessment. The
NPVs of the sample have been recalculated according to the various SDRs set in the
regional UPI reports and in the guidelines of other countries (Tables 3 and 4).
The results clearly show how much the assessment of the economic feasibility of
each measure is so highly variable that a measure that initially achieved economic
feasibility may cross the threshold of economic unfeasibility (Figs. 5). With refer-
ence to the Italian regions, it emerges that all of the retrofitting measures of the
sample would achieve economic feasibility, according to the constraint (5), if they are
assessed in Campania. On the contrary, all of the measures would be rejected because

Table 3 Cash Flows (euros) of the sample (source: UPI report)

Measure Year 0 1 … 5 6 … 25
a −1,379,746 141,432 … 141,432 61,432 … 61,432
b −240,020 11,849 … 11,849 12,454 … 12,454
c −348,000 46,004 … 46,004 11,204 … 11,204
d −255,955 15,045 … 15,045 15,045 … 15,045
e −36,000 4,850 … 4,850 1,250 … 1,250
f −433,035 25,546 … 25,546 25,546 … 25,546

Table 4 Social Discount

Social Discount Rate
Rates set in the Italian regions
and other countries ITALY UPI report Campania Region 2.5%
UPI report Calabria Region 3.0%
UPI report Puglia Region 6.5%
EUROPE EU Guide CBA 3.0%
EU Energy Policy 10.0%
UK Green book 3.5%
Germany 4.0%
USA USA intergenerational 2.5%
USA OMB 3.0%
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 175

Fig. 5 NPVs of the retrofitting measures of the case study according to the different SDRs per
countries

of being economically unfeasible in Apulia. There is a middle case in Calabria, as

all of the measures would be economically feasible, with the exception of measure
b.
If we assume that all the measures were implemented in other countries, the results
are again diversified. In the United States, all of the retrofitting measures would have
a NPV greater than zero only if the intergenerational discount rate is chosen, while
in the United Kingdom, all of the measures would have a negative NPV according
to the Green Book, except for measure e that has the lowest elasticity of NPV to
the discount rate and, as a consequence, is moderately affected by the change in the
discount rate value. All of the measures, except for measure b, achieve economic
feasibility is the result of the setting of the SDR according to both the Office of
Management and Budget in the USA or the Guide to CBA in the EU. The worst
results are achieved when the discount rates are applied in Germany and according
the EU energy policy rules because they would render all of the alternatives highly
economically unfeasible. For example, analyzing the trend of NPV to SDR for the
retrofitting measure c in detail, it can be seen that, although the economic feasibility is
good in the assumption of a SDR set at zero, as it ensures net benefits above 100,000
Euros, the feasibility becomes quickly bad as soon as the SDR exceeds 3.25% (which
is the Internal Rate of Return IRR) and the NPV becomes lower than zero (Fig. 6).

3.1 Some Concerns from the Case Study

The case study demonstrates that we can get to the paradoxical case in which political
discretion prevails over economic theory and contradictory investment decisions can
be made when political views are not clearly expressed, and different economic
paradigms are followed. The variation in the SDR between different Italian regions
176 G. Napoli

Fig. 6 NPV of the retrofitting measure c

is sufficiently wide as to reverse the resulting economic feasibility of the very same
energy retrofitting measure from one region to another (i.e. a positive NPV in one
region becomes negative in another, or vice versa). This influences the public decision
process for a significant proportion of public investments in the energy retrofitting
field. The decision to invest, obviously, may change from one country to another,
even if it is quite understandable that theoretical and practical positions on such a
debated issue may lead to differentiated outcomes when economic, social, political,
and cultural conditions vary.
Several scholars have presented analogous cases in their studies. Garcia-Gusano
[15] demonstrate that the selection of the SDR is decisive for the choice of the
preferable energy systems optimization model. Furthermore, the results of their study
show that the SDR particularly affects the competition between different renewable
technologies, such as hydro and wind options, and also the renewable contribution
to the electricity generation mix, whereas the nuclear remains indifferent to the
SDR. Kossova and Sheluntcova [20] propose a method to estimate different SDRs
for cost–benefit analysis in several economic industries in Russia in the absence of
generally accepted procedures for evaluating the performance of projects. According
to the study by Hansson et al. [17], there are considerable differences between the
SDR used by the different Swedish authorities that have responsibility in several
important policy areas, such as energy, environmental conservation, climate, etc.
When different agencies work in the same policy area and use a different SDR, the
same project might be even rejected or accepted depending on the agency performing
the analysis.
As common considerations emerging from these similar case studies, we can
state that the choice of discount rates in Swedish decision process on environmental
policy, as well in some Italian Regions, is uncoordinated, insufficiently justified
and transparent, and therefore not politically accountable [17]. For these reasons, it
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 177

would be recommendable that the political system takes responsibility for instituting
a protocol to harmonize the SDR and to obtain consistency in public decision process,
at least with regards to the same policy field. However, the potential variation of SDR
by investment typology or by geographical areas should be decided as the result of
a transparent socio-political consensual convergence.

3.2 Theoretical and Practical Implications

With regards to the outcome of the case study, if we believe that members of one
generation have responsibilities to those of the next, the key questions remain the
same, namely: What energy policy should be supported? Which economic theory on
the Social Discount Rate should a country adopt? and What practice should a country
implement for its assessment? All these questions have become particularly relevant
as the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is focused also on green transition
which is currently being implemented. This means that huge public funds will be
invested to achieve the EU target of climate neutrality by 2050 in the coming years
in energy retrofitting projects whose economic feasibility will have to be assessed
by applying the SDR [4, 22].
The evaluation of public investments in Italy could be adapted to follow the
European rules of the Guide to Cost–benefit analysis according to which the discount
rate is set at 3% [10], but it would nevertheless be opportune to open a wide debate
to achieve a conscious compliance with the assumptions of a single paradigm, be it
either time preference or opportunity cost. There are already some proposals, e.g.
an evaluation protocol of the SDR based on the Ramsey formula and on economic
and socio-demographic data [27, 28], a protocol of a declining rate, which uses
probabilistic laws and allows to distinguish between projects with intergenerational
or intragenerational effects [21], a model for dual discounting rates that are a function
among other variables, of an Environmental Performance Index [29], or finally a
procedure, applied to the risk of flood damage, that relates the variation of SDR to
the risk level of each geographical region [37].
It is crucial to indicate a procedure, either different to or in line with the EU rules,
that leads to establishing a common value of the SDR in order to limit or, even,
remove the discretionary powers held by local public authorities, particularly when
they are drawing on national funding.
Another specific issue regards whether the value of the discount rate should
be further differentiated when public investments in energy retrofitting measures
concern buildings or areas subject to planning constraints intended to protect
architectural, landscape and environmental quality.
In this case, further questions arise: Should the value of the SDR applied vary
due to the presence of these constraints? In terms of SDR, should there be an addi-
tional difference when assessing investments in energy retrofitting measures in an
area with or without environmental, landscape, or historical value? How should the
178 G. Napoli

SDR consider investments in common goods whose quality is bequeathed between

generations?
The theme of intergenerational equity is linked not only to the translation of
consumption over time, but, above all, to the transmission of goods that represent
common heritage. In terms of which approach is more appropriate for assessing the
SDR in such cases, some considerations may be made.
The social opportunity cost paradigm is not suitable, not only for the numerous
reasons outlined above, but mostly because the profitability rate of an alternative
investment in the market is the result of private decision, individual need, and
economic myopia. As a consequence, it cannot be considered an adequate bench-
mark for discounting long-term public investment on energy resources and cultural
and landscape goods that will be passed on to future generations.
The social time preference paradigm embraces issues of both intergenerational
equity and distributive principle that are strictly related to the resources involved in the
case study, however the quantification of the SDR implies making an express choice
about adopting a descriptive or normative method. The former would refer, again,
to the market, the latter would force the politic system to assume its responsibilities
and to decide how to translate theoretical principles into a number, namely the value
of the SDR.
Some recent government documents show there is a willingness to apply low
SDRs, for example 1.5% in the UK and 1.7% in Germany, even if that is gener-
ally in special cases, e.g. risk to life values (HM [19]). This trend is recognized
as being positive but further steps beyond the current thresholds could be taken by
setting the SDR at 1% to assess investments involving primary resources as well
as environmental, landscape, or historic goods. This value would be socially and
economically commendable because it favors high-energy-efficiency investments,
reduces the discrimination between generations, and still appreciates the sacrifices
made by the current generation in preserving the common heritage.

4 Conclusions

Since the Social Discount rate contributes to the assessment of the economic feasi-
bility of public investment, the study analyzes the ongoing debate surrounding
different and contrasting approaches taken when defining the SDR, as well as the
pragmatic rules implemented to assess it.
A case study, consisting of energy retrofitting measures for public buildings, is
proposed as an opportunity to verify the economic impact of varying the SDR within
certain Italian regions and European countries. The results reveal that, particularly in
Italy, the discretionary powers of local authorities in the setting of the SDR applied
to the cost–benefit analysis without any stated protocol or theoretical approach can
result in contradictory investment decisions being made and may generate social
inequality and low economic feasibility.
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 179

Evaluating the effects of such a choice through specific case studies could aid
public administrations to reach an awareness of the ethical role and economic conse-
quences of setting the SDR in relation to, for example, the competition between
regions in obtaining funding for public investments at a local level, or the competi-
tion between countries in terms of willingness to invest in energy-saving policies at
a global level.
The asymmetries of the SDRs and the political-administrative strabismus thus
cause competitive and differential asymmetries of opportunity between countries
as well as between regions of the same country. In this case, asymmetries deform
the social system producing economic inefficiencies, environmental alterations and
intragenerational and intergenerational inequalities.
The ethical role of the SDR becomes even stronger when the energy retrofitting
measures involve cultural and natural heritage. In such cases, this research agrees with
the view that intergenerational equity and distributive principles call for the adoption
of the STP rather than the SOC approach and, in the event that a no discounting
theory is politically and socially unacceptable, at least for the SDR to be set at a very
low value, according to the trends expressed in the latest European documents. In
Italy, especially, further operative researches should be developed to promote a wide
scientific, cultural and political debate on this issue, moreover a theoretical approach
should be embraced as well as a transparent protocol for setting the SDR in order to
avoid inequities between regions.
With reference to the European Green Deal, green transition and Recovery and
Resilience Facility, the evaluation of projects in the field of energy and sustainability,
the Italian researchers should participate in the theoretical elaboration on SDR eval-
uation approaches and procedures, and promote both social communication and
political acceptance to activate the catalysis of different interests able to translate the
theoretical elaborations into practices or regulatory proposals.

References

1. Arrow K, Cropper M, Gollier C, Groom B, Heal G, Newell NW, Pindyck R, Pizer W, Portney P,
Sterner T, Tol RSJ, Weitzman M (2013) Determining benefits and costs for future generations.
Science 341(6144):349–350
2. Barbaro S, Napoli G (2023) Energy communities in urban areas: comparison of energy strategy
and economic feasibility in Italy and Spain. Land 12(7):1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12
071282
3. Barbaro S, Napoli G (2021) The financial costs in energy efficient district. Alternatives scenarios
from the demo sites of the CITyFiED Program. In: Gervasi O et al (Eds) Computational science
and its applications ICCSA 2021. LNCS vol 12954, pp 93–108, Springer, Cham. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-030-86979-3_7
4. Barbaro S, Napoli G, Giuffrida S, Trovato MR (2020) Smart Cities ed efficientamento ener-
getico: opportunità e sfide dall’European Green Deal e dai programmi europei. LaborEst
20:92–98. https://doi.org/10.19254/LaborEst.20.14
5. Bradford DA (1975) Constrains on government investment opportunities and the choice of
discount rate. Amer Econ Rev 65(5):887–889
180 G. Napoli

6. Broome J (2012) Climate matters: ethics in a warming world. WW Norton.

7. Burgess DF, Zerbe RO (2011) Appropriate discounting for benefit-cost analysis. J Benefit-Cost
Anal 2(2):1–20
8. Caney S (2014) Climate change, intergenerational equity and social discounting rate. Politics
Philos Econ 13(4):320–342
9. Dahl A, Meunier D, Quinet E, Walther C (2015) New trends in cost-benefit assessment in
public investments in France and Germany. In: hEART conference, 9–11 September 2015,
Copenhagen
10. European Commission (2014) Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects. http://ec.
europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/cba_guide.pdf
11. European Commission (2014) A policy framework for climate and energy in the period
from 2020 up to 2030. http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/ia_carried_out/docs/ia_
2014/swd_2014_0015_en.pdf
12. European Commission (2020) COM/2020/662. A renovation wave for Europe. Greening our
buildings, creating jobs, improving lives. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?
qid=1603122220757&uri=CELEX:52020DC0662
13. Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructures (2016) The 2030 federal transport
infrastructure plan. Berlin
14. Freeman M, Groom B, Spackman M (2018) Social discount rate for cost-benefit analysis: a
report for HM treasury. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/685904.pdf
15. Garcia-Gusano D, Espegren K, Lind A, Kirkengen M (2016) The role of the discount rates in
energy systems optimisation models. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 59:56–72
16. Groom B (2017) International guidelines on social discount rate. http://www.strategie.gouv.fr/
sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/07_ben_groom_international_guidelines_on_social_
discount_rates.pdf
17. Hansson SO, Lilieqvist K, Edvardsson Björnberg K, Vredin Johansson M (2016) Time horizons
and discount rates in Swedish environmental policy: who decides and on what grounds? Futures
76:55–66
18. HM Treasury (2008) Intergenerational wealth transfer and social discounting: Supplementary
Green Book guidance. http://www.gov.uk/government/publication
19. HM Treasury (2018) The green book. Central Government Guidance on appraisal and
evaluation. http://www.gov.uk/government/publication
20. Kossova T, Sheluntcova M (2016) Evaluating performance of public sector projects in Russia:
The choice of a social discount rate. Int J Proj Manag 34(3):403–411
21. Maselli G, Nesticò A (2020) A probabilistic model for the estimation of declining discount
rate. Valori e Valutazioni 24:181–194
22. Napoli G, Barbaro S, Giuffrida S, Trovato MR (2020) The European green deal: new challenges
for the economic feasibility of energy retrofit at district scale. In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della
Spina L (Eds) New metropolitan perspectives, knowledge dynamics and innovation-driven
policies towards urban and regional transition, smart innovation, systems and technologies vol.
178, pp 1248–1258. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48279-4_116
23. Napoli G, Bottero M, Ciulla G, Dell’Anna F, Figueira JR, Greco S (2020) Supporting public
decision process in buildings energy retrofitting operations: the application of a multiple criteria
decision aiding model to a case study in southern italy. Sustain Cities Soc 60:1–15. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102214
24. Napoli G, Corrao R, Scaccianoce G, Barbaro S, Cirrincione L (2022) Public and private
economic feasibility of green areas as a passive energy measure: a case study in the mediter-
ranean city of Trapani in southern Italy. Sustainability 14(4):1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1
4042407
25. Napoli G, Gabrielli L, Barbaro S (2017) The efficiency of the incentives for the public build-
ings energy retrofit. The case of the Italian Regions of the “Objective convergence.” Valori e
Valutazioni 18:25–39
Social Discount Rate in Balance Between Intergenerational Solidarity … 181

26. Napoli G, Mamì A, Barbaro S, Lupo S (2019) Scenarios of climatic resilience, economic
feasibility and environmental sustainability for the refurbishment of the early 20th century
buildings. In: Mondini G, Stanghellini S, Oppio A, Bottero M, Abastante F (Eds) Values and
functions for future cities, green energy and technology, pp 89–115. Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23786-8_6
27. Nesticò A, De Mare G, Conte A (2015) Approcci Teorici and empirici nella stima del saggio
sociale di sconto. La formula di Ramsey per un valore nazionale aggiornato. Valori e Valutazioni
14:47–62
28. Nesticò A, Maselli G (2020) A protocol for the estimate of the social rate of time preference:
the case studies of Italy and the USA. J Econ Studies 47(3):527–545
29. Nesticò A, Maselli G, Ghisellini P, Ulgiati S (2023) A dual probabilistic discounted approach
to assess economic and environmental impacts. Environ Resource Econ 85:239–265
30. Nordhaus WD, Boyer J (2000) Warming the world: economic models of global warming. The
MIT Press
31. Office of Management and Budget (1992) Circular A-94: guidelines and discount rates for
benefit-cost analysis of federal programs. Washington DC
32. Office of Management and Budget (2003) Circular A-4: regulatory analysis. Washington DC
33. Ramsey FP (1928) A mathematical theory of saving. Econ J 38(152):543–559
34. Rendall M (2011) Climate change and the threat of disaster: the moral case for taking out
insurance at our grandchildren’s expense. Political Studies 59(4):884–899
35. Spackman M (2017) Social discounting: the SOC/STP divide. In: Grantham research institute
on climate change and the environment, Working Paper 182
36. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: the stern review. Cambridge University Press
37. Trovato MR, Giuffrida S (2018) The monetary measurement of flood damage and the valuation
of the proactive policies in Sicily. Geosciences 8(141):1–24
38. UNCED (1993) Report of the United Nations conference on environment and development,
Rio de Janeiro 3–14 June 1992. United Nations Publication
39. United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for sustainable devel-
opment. A/RES/70/1. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%
20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf
40. WCED (1987) Our common future. United Nations. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/
content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf
41. Weitzman ML (2001) Gamma discounting. Am Econ Rev 91(1):260–271
42. Weitzman ML (2011) Fat-tailed uncertainty in the economics of catastrophic climate change.
Rev Environ Econ Policy 5(2):275–292
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks
for Optimization

Giovanna Acampa, Mariolina Grasso, and Claudia Mariaserena Parisi

Abstract The paper proposes critical remarks on the teaching of Appraisal in Archi-
tecture and Engineering academic courses at international level. The focus is on the
top ten schools of Architecture and Engineering ranked as such by the 2019 QS World
Ranking by Subject which takes into account several parameters such as academic
reputation, employer reputation, faculty-student, international faculty, international
student and citation per faculty. The aim is to improve Appraisal teaching, outlining
the best practices that should be adopted in Universities. Such best practices has been
defined by comparing content, role and place dedicated to the discipline according
to Italian tradition and in the top ten international Schools of Architecture and
Engineering.

Keywords Appraisal · Valuation · Teaching · Training · Profession

1 Introduction

The last few years brought significant changes in disciplines related to Appraisal.
Governments around the world introduced laws to modify projects’ content drafting
and submitting. New technologies now available allow for greater transparency and
improvements in the efficiency of processes and quality of projects. New models of
project management and the introduction of BIM (Building Information Modeling)
optimized building processes, reducing time and cost along the whole life of buildings
and infrastructures, from planning to the management. At the same time, the princi-
ples of social, economic and environmental sustainability are increasingly established

G. Acampa (B) · M. Grasso · C. M. Parisi

Kore University of Enna, Viale Delle Olimpiadi 1, 94100 Enna, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
M. Grasso
e-mail: [email protected]
C. M. Parisi
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 183
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_13
184 G. Acampa et al.

Table 1 Appraisal discipline according to CUN (source: [2]

Area Area 08—Civil Engineering and Architecture
Macro sectors 08/A Landscape and Infrastructural Engineering
Recruitment field 08/A3—Infrastructural and Transportation Engineering, Real
Estate Appraisal and Investment Valuation
Disciplinary-scientific area ICAR/22 Real Estate Appraisal

at both regulatory and academic levels becoming a topic widely taught in Engineering
and Architecture schools.
Training an engineer or an architect to be technically and ethically skilled in
creating and running sustainable projects, necessarily requires including the teaching
of Appraisal in his/her educational program.
The paper aims to define the best practices for teaching appraisal by relying upon
the studies carried out on the Italian Universities of Architecture and Engineering
and onthe top 10 universities in the world. The choice of the Italian model of teaching
Appraisal as a best practice is because there is a significant difference between Italy
and most other highly developed countries as far as teaching this discipline at an
academic level is concerned.
In Italy, the art.15 of Law no. 240/2010 [6] breakdowns academic disciplines
into four levels (from general to particular): Areas, Competition Macro Sectors,
Recruitment Fields and Disciplinary-scientific areas (or SSD). Appraisal is clearly
and explicitly positioned in a specific SSD, whose code is ICAR/22 (Table 1).
In most countries outside of Italy, on the other hand, academic disciplines in
general do not have a well-defined position in an area or an identification code for
each scientific disciplinary sector. To date, there is no consensus on how academic
disciplines should be classified [3]. Generally, they are sorted first of all in major
areas i.e. Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, Natural Sciences and Applied Sciences.
Although Appraisal is not explicitly positioned in any of those and in any disciplinary
sector, the research shows that Engineering and Architecture schools in Europe do
not include specific teaching of Appraisal, whose content is broken down into a wide
range of teachings related to it but focused on other topics.
As a further specific feature of the Italian approach, the courses in which else-
where Appraisal is taught—such as real estate and project management –are for
post-graduate students while in other countries in Europe are complete degree
courses.
The Seminar organized in Syracuse (Sicily) on July the 11th and 12th, 2019 by
SIEV (Italian Society of Appraisal and Valuation) on “Valuation science, Natural
Structures, Technological Infrastructures, Cultural Superstructures”, was a valuable
opportunity to reflect on the role of Appraisal at international level. A similar and
in-depth study regarding Italy was carried out in 2017 and presented during another
Seminar organized at Kore University of Enna once again organized by SIEV.1

1The Seminar organised by the SIEV: “Appraisal Discipline in the Schools of Architecture and
Engineering” held in University of Enna Kore, November 22, 2017.
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization 185

In that event, authors pointed at some problematic issues. They mapped Appraisal
courses as held in all Italian Universities, their contribution to the overall educational
programs in terms of number of training credits to which they entitled students, the
name of the courses and their main teaching topics, and submitted an outline of these
courses as based on the contents and objectives of their programs [1]. The results
showed a gradual weakening of the discipline in the Architecture, Engineering, Urban
Planning and Design Courses2 and an increase in qualified lecturers in scientific
disciplines different from ICAR/22.3
Looking at the titles of the courses, authors identified five main thematic areas
in which they are held: Economics Principles, Appraisal Procedures, Economic and
Financial Evaluations, Multicriteria Analysis and Environmental Assessments and
Professional Practice.
The historical roots of Appraisal within the Italian Schools of Engineering and
Architecture mainly lay on theoretical constructs [4]. Yet the analysis carried out
shows that this approach had changed. Indeed, theoretical constructs are increasingly
supported by teachings based on professional practice. Appraisal is not anymore
held as single and detached teaching within Engineering and Architecture courses of
studies, but it is transversal teaching of all design subjects. Below we will analyse if
the top ten University considered follow the Italian trend.

2 Data Collection Analysis

The research was carried out in the following steps:

1. Selection of the best worldwide Universities of Architecture and Engineering
2. Analysis of structure of the Degree Courses in the Italian and top 10 Universities
selected
3. Positioning of Appraisal within the Degree courses of the selected Universities
4. Identification of the skills of the professors teaching Appraisal.
Our analysis relies on a database created on purpose and populated with infor-
mation retrieved from the Universities websites, referring to the academic year
2018–2019 (it shall be updated to include also 2019–2020).

2 Reduction in Training Credits (CT) allocated to the teaching of the Appraisal Discipline from
2011 to 2018. The total number of credits attributed to the discipline decreased overall, with a total
reduction of 182 credits.
3 SECS-P/06—Applied Economics: in which the main focus is on strictly theoretical issues; AGR/

01—Agricultural Economics and Rural Appraisal: sector from which our discipline was born
and a natural field of identification due to continuity; ING-IND/35—Business and Management
Engineering: closely linked to skills in industrial production cycles.
186 G. Acampa et al.

Fig. 1 University raking according to QS world ranking (by authors)

2.1 Selection of the Best Worldwide Universities

of Architecture and Engineering

We selected the top 10 universities of Architecture and Engineering in the world

relying on the QS world ranking (2021),4 which is based on the following indica-
tors: academic reputation, employer reputation, faculty-student, international faculty,
international student and citation per faculty (H-INDEX indicator).
According to the QS world ranking, the top 10 Universities are (Fig. 1):
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (http://web.mit.edu)
• University College of London (UCL) (http://www.ucl.ac.uk)
• Delft University of Technology (https://www.tudelft.nl/)
• University of California Berkeley (UCB) ( https://www.berkeley.edu/)]
• Harvard University ( https://www.harvard.edu)]
• National University of Singapore (NUS) (https://nus.edu.sg/)
• ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology) https://ethz.ch/de.html)
• Tsinghua University (https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/index.htm)
• University of Cambridge (https://www.cam.ac.uk/homepage-experiment)
• The University of Tokyo (https://www.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/index.htm).

4 QS World University Rankings is an annual publication of university rankings edited by

Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). Previously it was known as Times Higher Education–QS World Univer-
sity Rankings because it was part of the Times Higher Education (THE) magazine. In partnership
with Elsevier, the QS system now includes the global overall and subject rankings (which names
the world’s top universities for the study of 51 different subjects and five composite faculty areas),
alongside with five independent regional tables (Asia, Latin America, Emerging Europe and Central
Asia, the Arab Region, and BRICS).
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization 187

For our research, we also grouped the Universities in two subgroups: the
European ones (University college of London (UCL)—Delft University of Tech-
nology—ETH Zurich—University of Cambridge) and the non-European ones
(Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)—University of California Berkeley
(UCB)—Harvard University—National University of Singapore (NUS)—Tsinghua
University—University of Tokyo).
Below is a brief description of the main characteristics of the Universities
analysed:
1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is a private university founded
in 1861. Initially, it was a small community of students and researchers, while
today it has evolved into an educational behemoth with 11.342 (2019) under-
graduate and graduate students. MIT is now an independent, coeducational,
privately endowed university organized into five schools: Architecture and
Planning; Engineering; Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences; Management;
Science.
2. University College of London (UCL) is a public university assessed as the
top university in the UK for research strength in the last Research Excellence
Framework (REF 2014). UCL has 35.897 students and 18.000 students from
outside the UK, with over 150 countries represented, providing a truly global
perspective. UCL is organized into 11 departments covering all disciplinary
area: Built Environmental, Brain Sciences, Arts and Humanitas, Engineering
Sciences, Laws and Life Sciences.
3. Delft University of Technology is a public university founded in 1842. It partic-
ularly excels in several STEM subjects, such as Civil and structural Engineering,
Mechanical Engineering, Environmental studies, Engineering and Technology,
Architecture. Based in Delft in the Netherlands, Delft University of Technology
has one of the largest campuses in the world. It has 18.896 students.
4. The University of California, Berkeley (UCB) is a public research univer-
sity founded in 1868 with 40.443 students. It is the flagship institution of the
ten research universities affiliated with the University of California system.
Berkeley is one of the 14 founding members of the Association of American
Universities and is home to some world-renowned research institutes, including
the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute and the Space Sciences Labora-
tory. Berkeley started with little more than 40 students but, as the first full-
curriculum university in California, it quickly gained ground on its illustrious
forebears. By the early 1940s, it had grown substantially and was ranked second
only to Harvard. TU Delft comprises eight faculties: Mechanical, Maritime and
Materials Engineering, Architecture and the Built Environment, Civil Engi-
neering and Geosciences, Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer
Science, Industrial Design Engineering, Aerospace Engineering, Technology,
Policy and Management and Applied Sciences.
5. Harvard University is a private university founded in 1636 with 23.583 students.
It is the oldest higher education institution in the United States and is widely
regarded in terms of its influence, reputation, and academic pedigree as a leading
188 G. Acampa et al.

university in not just the US but also the world. It is located in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, houses 10 degree-granting schools: Business, Dental Medicine,
Arts and Sciences, Divinity, Design, Education, Engineering and Applied
Sciences, Law and Public Health and Advanced Study.
6. National University of Singapore is a public university centred in Asia founded
in 1904 and it is Singapore’s flagship university, which offers a global approach
to education and research, with a focus on Asian perspectives and expertise. It
has 29.080 students and has 17 faculties and schools across three campuses:
Arts and Social Sciences, Business, Computing, Dentistry, Engineering, Law,
Medicine, Public Health. Its transformative education includes a broad-based
curriculum underscored by multi-disciplinary courses and cross-faculty enrich-
ment. Over 38,000 students from 100 countries enrich the community with
their diverse social and cultural perspectives. NUS also strives to create a
supportive and innovative environment to promote creative enterprise within
its community.
7. ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology) is a public university and
one of the world’s leading universities in science and technology and is known
for its cutting-edge research and innovation. It was established in 1855 as the
Swiss Federal Polytechnic School. The university, referred to in English as
the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, has 16 departments that
offer academic education and conduct scientific research in subjects ranging
from engineering and architecture to chemistry and physics. The university
has 18.563 students. Education at ETH Zurich combines solid theory with
practical application, and most degree programs build on strong mathematical
foundations.
8. Tsinghua University is a public university established in 1911 and has 37.294
students. It engages in extensive research and offers 51 bachelor’s degree
programs, 139 master’s degree programs, and 107 doctoral programs through
20 colleges and 57 departments covering a broad range of subjects, including
Science, Engineering, Arts and Literature, Social Sciences, Medicine.
9. Cambridge University is located in the centre of the ancient city of Cambridge,
50 miles north of London. It is a collegiate public research institution that
serves more than 19.876 students from all corners of the globe. The univer-
sity consists of numerous listed buildings and is divided into 31 autonomous
colleges. The six academic schools—Arts and Humanities, Biological Sciences,
Clinical Medicine, Humanities and Social Sciences, Physical Sciences, and
Technology—are spread across the university’s colleges, housing roughly 150
faculties and other institutions.
10. The University of Tokyo was established in 1877 as the first imperial univer-
sity. It is one of Japan’s most storied and prestigious higher education estab-
lishments. Tokyo consists of 10 faculties—Agriculture, Arts and Sciences,
Economics, Education, Engineering, Law, Letters, Medicine, Pharmaceutical
and Sciences—and 15 graduate schools, and has 27.559 students enrolled, of
which 2,100 are from overseas. Unusually for a Japanese university, it also runs
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization 189

Fig. 2 The ratio between the number of students enrolled in the faculties of Engineering and
Architecture, and the total number of students

undergraduate programs taught entirely in English: the International Program

on Japan in East Asia and the International Program on Environmental Sciences.
Figure 2 gives an indication on the number of students enrolled in the School of
Architecture and Engineering of the ten selected universities compared to the total.
Although the QS World Ranking ranks MIT University first in terms of Engi-
neering and Architecture courses, the number of enrolled students is rather low. This
could be seen as a strength for the University. Indeed, when there are fewer students,
the quality of the teacher-student relationship might improve, especially in those
courses that involve design activities and workshops.

2.2 Analysis of the Structure of the Degree Courses Structure

in Italian and Top 10 Universities Selected

Before proceeding with the analysis of the position of Appraisal in the Schools of
Engineering and Architecture it is necessary to compare structure of the Italian and
the top 10 universities selected, in terms of structure of the Degree Courses (Table 2).
The main difference in the structure of the degree courses concerns their duration.
Moreover, in Italy not all degree courses are divided into a bachelor (1st level) or
master (2nd level): often there is a single degree course lasting 5 years.
190 G. Acampa et al.

Table 2 Comparison between Italian and the top 10 University of Architecture and Engineering—
the structure of the Degree Courses
Degree Italy and top 10 selected universities Average Common Note
level completion prerequisite
time
Bachelor’s Italy 3 years High school In Italy, it is
degree diploma or called degree
equivalent course of 1st
level
International selected universities 4 years High school
diploma or
equivalent
Master’s Italy 2 years Bachelor’s In Italy is
degree degree called degree
course of 2nd
level
International selected universities 1–2 years Bachelor’s
degree
Doctoral Italy 3 years Master’s
degree degree
International selected universities 2 years or Master’s Sometimes a
more degree bachelor’s
degree is
acceptable

2.3 Analysis of Appraisal Within the Degree Courses

of the Selected Universities

Having clarified the structural differences between the Italian degree courses and
those in the top 10 universities, the next step in our research was checking if Appraisal
is taught in the courses listed below:
• Architecture
• Engineering
• Project Management
• Urban Planning
• Real Estate
The graph (Fig. 3) shows the percentage distribution of the aforementioned Degree
Courses within the 10 selected universities:
It is interesting to highlight that in Italy Project management and Real estate are
taught at post-graduate level and are not proper Degree Courses as in most of the top
world 10 universities.
Then, we analysed two main aspects regarding Appraisal.
1. We divided the degree courses of the top 10 selected universities in which
Appraisal is taught, according to their title. On one side (left column) all courses
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization 191

Fig. 3 Distribution of the aforementioned Degree Courses within the 10 Universities analysed

Fig. 4 Mosaic of the denomination teachings: a “Real Estate Market”, b “Design and Building
construction”

that refer to “Real Estate Market” (Fig. 4a); on the other, those referring to
“Design and Building construction” (Fig. 4b).
The same research was carried out for the Italian Universities. We found 78
different titles for courses that most of the time refer to “Appraisal and Evaluation”.
Focusing on the content of the courses, five are the main topics: economic prin-
ciples, appraisal procedures, economic and financial assessments, multicriteria and
environmental assessments, professional practice5 (Table 3).

5 Economics Principles provides a foundation in economics, especially related to consumer and

produce theory. Appraisal Procedures provides the procedures to express a judgment of value by
applying direct or indirect comparison (ascribed to Serpieri’s paradigm). Economic and Financial
Evaluations provide the basis for the evaluation of public and private investments in monetary terms
(e.g. Feasibility Study, Cost/Revenue Analysis, Cost/Benefit Analysis, etc.). Multicriteria Analysis
and Environmental Assessments consist of not monetary evaluations that support decision-making
process and of those assessments focused specifically on the environment, such as Environmental
192 G. Acampa et al.

Table 3 Appraisal discipline

Italy Economic principles
and its contents
Appraisal procedures
Economic and financial assessments
Multicriteria and environmental assessments
Professional practice
Top 10 “Design and Building constructions
“Real Estate Market”

2. Once defined the content of Appraisal within the top 10 universities degree
courses considered we tried answering the question “how the discipline is
taught”?
We started our analysis with Engineering degree courses.
The School of Engineering of the University College of London (UCL) is the
one that offers the most complete educational training. Generally speaking, when
we talk about “complete educational training” or “best educational offers” we mean
that during the training period (Bachelor + Master degree courses) Appraisal is
taught considering both Real Estate Market and Design and Building Construction
approaches. This is the case in UCL’s bachelor’s and master’s degree courses.
Although Appraisal is also taught at the University of Zurich in both Bachelor and
Master degree courses, they are only related to the Design and Building Construction
missing the topics referred to Real Estate Market. The same applies to the Bachelor’s
degree courses in Berkeley and NUS. In Delft University of Technology there are no
appraisal teaching in both the Bachelor and Master degree courses.
As for the degree courses in Architecture, in our view Zurich and Berkeley’s
universities provide the best educational offers. Appraisal is taught at both Bachelor
and Master level, addressing a broad range of topics relating both to Design and
Building Constructions and Real estate market.
The analysis of the degree courses of UCL and Delft shows a fairly homogeneous
picture. Indeed, the discipline is taught in the Bachelor’s degree courses focusing
mainly on issues related to Design and Building constructions.
In MIT and Harvard, Appraisal is taught only as part of the Master degree courses,
and the topics are the same as the two Universities mentioned before. An exception
is provided by NUS university. Although there are both bachelor and Master degree
courses in Architecture, we noticed a blank space as far as the teaching of Appraisal
is concerned.
The analysis of the degree courses in Urban Planning showed a mixed picture.
First of all, no one among the selected universities provides complete educational
training. The degree courses in MIT, UCL, and Berkeley universities follow the
same “structure”. Appraisal is taught both at Bachelor and Master levels, but the

Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment. The Profession Practice is related to
the practice of architects and engineers (e.g. public tender, project management, etc.). [4].
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization 193

content only refers to Real Estate market. Among all the Universities under investi-
gations, Delft is the only one where the teaching of Appraisal covers both Real Estate
Market and Design and Building Constructions topics. The universities of Harvard
and Singapore show two opposing situations. The first one includes Appraisal in the
Master degree courses dealing with real estate market topics. On the contrary, at NUS
university the discipline is taught during the Bachelor course. Finally, the analysis
of Zurich University degree courses shows that the discipline is not taught at all.
Within the Real Estate degree courses, all the subjects addressed can be considered
as part of Appraisal. Therefore, in this case, the analysis will not refer to the contents
but only to the duration of the training period. At NUS we can find both Bachelor
and Master degree courses while in UCL, MIT and Berkeley there are only Master
courses. The University of Delft, Zurich and Harvard have neither one nor the other.
Last but not least we analysed Project Management study courses. As high-
lighted during the analysis of Engineering degree courses, UCL is the only univer-
sity (among the ones selected) offering a full educational offer. NUS addressed the
teaching of Appraisal during the Bachelor course considering only Real Estate market
topics. Also, in this case, most of the universities under exams do not have Project
Management degree courses.

3 Discussion and Conclusion

The paper aims to define the best practices of appraisal teaching by relying upon the
studies carried out among the Italian Universities of Architecture and Engineering
and the top 10 universities in the world, being complementary.
To reach the goal we analyzed the teaching of Appraisal in the degree courses
of the selected international universities. The degree courses were grouped into 5
macro areas: Architecture, Engineering, Urban Planning, Real Estate and Project
management. For each macro-area, we checked and analyzed the contents of the
Appraisal teaching, coming to the following remarks:
• Architecture degree courses: in the top 10 selected universities the teaching of
Appraisal is equally distributed among Bachelor and Master degree courses.
• As for the subjects taught, the most addressed sphere regards Design and Building
Constructions.
• Looking at the Architecture degree courses in Italian universities„ Appraisal has
a central role as the full range of topics6 covered by the discipline is addressed.
• Following the analysis carried out above, we can state that the best practice
regarding Appraisal teaching within Architecture degree courses is the Univer-
sity of Zurich because it recognizes the full identity of Appraisal. During their

6 Real Estate market and Design and Building Constructions.

194 G. Acampa et al.

educational training, students are introduced there to rigorous methods of evalu-

ation and trained to supervise the design process at any scale. Moreover, they are
educated to be sensible and careful to space and to achieve sustainable results.
• Engineering degree courses: In the Engineering degree programs the situation
appears very different. In this macro-area, the blank spaces are many as it happens
in Italian Schools of Engineering. Generally speaking, the analysis concerning
where and how Appraisal is taught has revealed a tendency to pay more attention to
aspects related to design and building constructions only in the early phases of the
students’ education (Bachelor degree courses). Only UCL schools of Engineering
tend to attribute greater weight to Appraisal, as it is introduced to the student both
in Bachelor and Master degree courses and the teaching programs focus on all
the main principles characterizing our discipline.
• Urban Planning degree courses: As for Urban Planning course of studies we point
out that the teaching of Appraisal is focused on Real Estate Market topics. This
is due to the fact that urban studies are mainly based on political evaluations,
considered as economic aspects applied to the territory. Moreover, Appraisal is
often inherent to the process of preparing the plan. In particular, this approach
is found within the American (MIT and Berkeley) and English (UCL) urban
Planning Schools.
• Real Estate degree courses: As mentioned in the previous paragraph, within the
Real Estate degree courses, all the subjects addressed can be referred to Appraisal.
In Italy, usually there are only post-graduate courses regarding Project manage-
ment and Real estate. In American (MIT + Berkeley), Anglo-Saxon (UCL) and
Asian (NUS) Schools the trend is instead to group all the subjects that may be
referred to Appraisal within degree courses. In particular NUS university provides
complete educational training. This trend is probably linked to the development
of the real estate market and the consequent need to train experts in the field.
• Project Management degree courses: In this case, we can find the best practice
in teaching appraisal only in the English School (UCL) both in Bachelor and
Master degree courses. Elsewhere, in many cases, Project Management courses
do not include Appraisal as part of the study plan. These “blank spaces” are
a clear sign of a gradual marginalization of the teaching of this subject. Where
there are “blank spaces”, it is doubtful whether Appraisal and Evaluation were not
absorbed into other teachings and considered only a mere quantification of costs
for the realization of an intervention, debasing its independence and consistency.

References

1. Acampa G, Giuffrida S, Napoli G (2018) Appraisals in Italy identity, contents, prospects. Valori
e valutazioni, 13–31
2. CUN (2000) Allegato_CAcademicFieldsandDisciplines.pdf, https://www.cun.it/uploads/
4079/Allegato_CAcademicFieldsandDisciplines.pdf?v=
3. ETH Zürich—Homepage, https://ethz.ch/de.html
Teaching Appraisal: Remarks for Optimization 195

4. Malacarne F, Di Fazio S (1989) (1989) Storia dell’estimo in Italia: fino agli inzi dell’Ottocento.
Edagricole, Bologna
5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), http://web.mit.edu
6. MIUR (2015) Italian Ministerial Decree of October the 30th 2015 n. 855—Atti Ministeriali
MIUR, http://attiministeriali.miur.it/anno-2015/ottobre/dm-30102015.aspx
7. New homepage, https://www.cam.ac.uk/homepage-experiment
8. NUS—National University of Singapore, https://nus.edu.sg/
9. Outline of academic disciplines, https://www.basicknowledge101.com/pdf/academicdiscipline
soutline.pdf
10. QS World University Rankings (2021) https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/
world-university-rankings/2021
11. Tsinghua University, https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/index.htm
12. TU Delft, https://www.tudelft.nl/
13. UCL: UCL—University College London, http://www.ucl.ac.uk
14. University of California, Berkeley, https://www.berkeley.edu/
15. University of Tokyo, https://www.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/index.html
16. University H, Harvard University, https://www.harvard.edu/
Value Bearers: Heuristic and Normativity
Planning Sustainable and Resilient
Cities: The Role of Strategic
Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Giulio Mondini , Vanessa Assumma , Marta Bottero ,

Caterina Caprioli , Giulia Datola , and Federico Dell’Anna

Abstract Before being implemented, urban plans must pass an impact assessment
to verify the effective support of the program for the sustainable development of a
territory from an environmental point of view. In this domain, the contribution of
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in supporting sustainable and resilient
planning processes is crucial. However, in urban and neighborhood contexts, where
different forces and entities influence the decision-making process, it is essential to
add social, economic and environmental aspects to the sustainability assessment. This
chapter explores the role of several evaluation tools that can consider different and
innovative assessment dimensions and issues related to the urban planning field. This
analysis concerns the case of the revision of the Municipal Plan of the City of Turin
to contribute to testing protocols for the sustainability of the Plan, tools to analyze
and evaluate urban resilience, and procedures to estimate Ecosystem Services (ES).
According to the point of view of the governance of urban transformations, the final
result of this preliminary research concerns the illustration of the role of assessment
tools to measure urban sustainability to respect the environment, promote public
health and well-being of citizens, and enhance economic productivity.

G. Mondini · M. Bottero · C. Caprioli · F. Dell’Anna

Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Politecnico di
Torino, 10125 Turin, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
M. Bottero
e-mail: [email protected]
C. Caprioli
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Dell’Anna
e-mail: [email protected]
V. Assumma (B)
Department of Architecture, Università di Bologna, 40136 Bologna, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
G. Datola
Department of Architecture and Urban Studies, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 199
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_14
200 G. Mondini et al.

Keywords Sustainability · Resilience · Uurban planning · Decision support

systems · Strategic environmental assessment (SEA)

1 Introduction

Cities are exposed to different types of risks and hazards, both natural and caused by
human activities [24]. Following these scenarios, the challenge of the current Urban
Agenda is making cities and communities more sustainable and resilient [4, 65, 71].
In recent decades, many initiatives and policies have been promoted worldwide to
achieve more sustainable practices [22, 67]. A prime example is the 2030 Agenda with
its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [68], followed by the recent Recovery
Plan for Europe “Next Generation EU” that aims to mitigate the economic, environ-
mental, and social impacts by the COVID-19 pandemic [19]. In the context of urban
planning practices, the SDG 11 “Sustainable cities and communities” is particularly
relevant since it explicitly considers the relationships between communities and the
design of future cities with the environment and social inclusion. The Urban Agenda
Habitat III [69] supports the achievement of the SDG11, conceiving cities as a source
of solutions rather than the cause of severe challenges.
Another relevant topic in urban planning is the concept of urban resilience. It
has become a fundamental pillar to set up policies to prepare cities to evolve, adapt
and respond to uncertainties [52] and achieve sustainable planning challenges [18].
Therefore, the necessity of new instruments to manage cities as complex systems
and their development according to this perspective has grown up, with specific
attention to Ecosystem Services (ES) [7, 53]. The increasing awareness of ecological
and environmental issues in cities has increased the interest in the field of ES. The
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) [40] or The Economics of Ecosystems and
Biodiversity (TEEB) [62], and the EU strategies for 2020,1 20302 , and 20503 testify
the relevance and the need to reduce the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ES,
both in the research activity and in the Urban Agenda. However, in transformation
processes and planning practices, the analysis of the impacts of land-use changes
over ES has been only partially explored [34].
In Italy, traditional planning has left space for strategic planning to manage cities
and territories, ever more fragile and sensitive to changes. Indeed, Public Adminis-
trations (PA) must employ normative and regulations, which reveal sometimes little
flexible and that need to build long-term strategies. Strategic Environmental Assess-
ment (SEA) plays a fundamental role as it proposes an innovative vision for urban
planning based on the analysis of the overall effects of plans and programs in envi-
ronmental, social, and economic terms, strong participation of all the stakeholders

1 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/pubs/pdf/factsheets/biodiversity2020/2020%20Biodiversity%
20FactsheetEN.pdf.
2 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/strategy/index_en.htm.
3 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/policy/index_en.htm.
Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic … 201

involved in the process and a long-term vision. Its innovative nature is the result of a
re-interpretation of the more traditional technical passages related to the inheritance
and evolution of the family of environmental assessments.
This chapter uses the case study of the ongoing revision of the Municipal Plan of
Turin, to explore the role of evaluation tools in supporting the design of new urban
strategies for achieving a more sustainable and resilient future. This contribution
select also some best practices able to achieve the sustainability and resilience goals
and favouring the building of next-generation plans.

2 Case Study: The Municipal Plan of Turin

The chapter considers the case study of the Municipal Plan of the City of Turin
(Piano Regolatore Generale Comunale—PRGC), which is interested in an ongoing
revision process according to the art. 17 LUR 56/1977 [50].
The PRGC of Turin was designed in 1995 by the architects V. Gregotti, A.
Cagnardi, and P. Cerri. Today it counts over 600 variations and modifications. The
current PA has chosen to (re)design the PRGC rather than to deliver a novel Plan to
Turin by taking the opportunity to adopt a strong environmental connotation. This
“ecosystemic” approach would be careful to the role of green areas and their ability
to deliver ES to citizens, to new energy protocols and the combination of urban
resilience and sustainability paradigms. These dimensions aim to guarantee a better
quality of life for both present and next generations. The revision of the PRGC is
nowadays passing through the preliminary phase of the planning process. In this
context, the Politecnico di Torino is collaborating with the PA since 2018 to support
the building of a sustainable and resilient strategy for Turin. This collaboration has
framed the city planning challenges and provided selected evaluation tools that can
help both planners and Decision Makers (DMs) to look in the same direction.

3 Methodology

This section focuses on specific issues and investigates suitable evaluation models
which can support the definition of a strategy for the Municipal Plan of Turin. They
are (i) the procedure of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) concerning the
review of the PRGC; (ii) the paradigm of urban resilience applied to urban planning;
(iii) the valuation of Ecosystem Services (ES) and its implication on the PRGC; (iv)
the Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment (NSA) as monitoring step of the Plan.
202 G. Mondini et al.

3.1 SEA Procedure and Assessment Tools to Support the New

Municipal Plan

Environmental Assessment (EA) supports the decision-making process in taking

sustainable policy decisions through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) procedures with particular attention
to economic development, social equity and environmental compatibility. SEA is
the procedure to assess and orient on the potential impacts generated by plans and
programs on the environment and its components.
It accompanies the construction of plans and programs and policies (PPPs) from
the early stages and, monitoring their performance after their approval. This means
that PPPs continue to be assessed and monitored throughout their life cycle, in terms
of environmental impacts, achievement of sustainable objectives, and adoption of
mitigation and/or compensation actions. SEA adapts itself according to the evolution
of planning, regulations, government systems [63]. In this sense, traditional and
innovative techniques and tools can be employed within SEA to build strategic futures
of cities and territories [2, 11]. The assessment process can be articulated as follows:
(1) Description of the context, (2) Spatial mapping and analysis; (3) Identification,
prediction, and assessment of impacts and coherence analysis. Multicriteria Decision
Analysis (MCDA) can help the decision-making process in the identification of the
hierarchical structure of the impacts and their evaluation by taking into account
the experts’ judgments, leading them toward a shared and sustainable solution [3].
However, MCDA can deliver a technical solution, even if the last decision is deserved
to PA. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) can integrate MCDA to deliver a
spatial visualization of the most suitable planning scenario [37]. Therefore, it is
reliable in keeping the participatory process to identify the priority objectives and
build a strategic vision of the Plan, e.g. the zeroing of land take by 2050 [57, 70].
Figure 1 illustrates the ability of SEA to support the PRGC in envisioning a more
sustainable and resilient city.
From a normative point of view, Piedmont was the first Italian region for
having introduced SEA with the Regional Law no.40/1998 that mentions “plans
and programs must be […] studied and organized according to analyses of environ-
mental compatibility” [51]. In this way, Piedmont became a reference pillar for the
other regions, and its Regional Law was conformed to D.lgs no. 4/2008 [47].

3.2 The Concept of Urban Resilience in Urban Planning

Over the last decade, the concept of urban resilience has been applied in the context
of urban planning [38, 39, 54]. Urban resilience can be defined as the ability of an
urban system to absorb, adapt and respond to changes, including different recent
urban issues, such as sustainability, governance, and economic development [5, 17].
Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic … 203

Fig. 1 Combination of evaluation techniques within SEA procedure to support the revision of the
Plan (Own elaboration, 2021)

Therefore, the new urban planning paradigm implies managing and planning cities
as complex and adaptive systems [17].
As for as evaluation tools are considered, the main challenges needed to integrate
the concept of urban resilience into the new PRGC of Turin [14], can be summarized
as follows:
(1) Evaluation of the current conditions of the urban system. The objective is to iden-
tify the main weaknesses that address the social, economic, environmental, and
governance dimensions. This is the fundamental requirement to define temporal
priorities and the scale of different interventions;
(2) Identification of the stresses that can affect the city, both at the current state
and over time. In detail, the stresses are those pressures that compromise the
general well-being of citizens, such as air pollution, traffic, waste production,
and unemployment rate;
(3) Designing and managing the city as a complex and dynamic system by taking
into account all its dimensions.
For this purpose, the System Dynamics Model (SDM) is considered a suitable
tool to support the definition of the new Municipal Plan of Turin, assessing it in
terms of urban resilience enhancement and improvement over time. The SDM is
based on the System Dynamics Approach (SD), introduced by Forrester in the’50 s
to understand and analyze complex and dynamic systems [21]. In detail, SDM is a
computer-aided tool that is used to analyze complex and dynamic systems. Moreover,
it also identifies the relationships among the different variables [58] and simulates
the dynamic behavior over time of the analyzed system. Thus, it is considered a
204 G. Mondini et al.

suitable tool to support the definition of urban development strategies [60], because
it can predict their evolution over time, assessing their possible impacts.
Moreover, related to the urban resilience topic, the SDM is applied in the literature
to analyze the dynamic behavior of different urban stresses over time. As an example,
the work proposed by Guan and colleagues analyses the behavior over time of the
population, also considering the evolution of the employment and unemployment
rate over time [28]. As well as, the study provided by Gu and colleagues is mainly
focused on the analysis of energy consumption and the problem of pollution and its
evolution over time [27].

3.3 Valuing Ecosystem Services (ES) in Planning Processes:

The Effects on the Municipal Plan

To realize a new strategic Municipal Plan, the city of Turin needs to consider the
impact of transformation processes and the land use change on ES. Ecosystems
and their components in cities are fundamental to achieving the inclusive, healthy,
resilient, safe, and sustainable living environment [36] required by future cities. ES
provide long-term conditions for life [45], health [35, 66], safety [15], good social
relations [20], and other essential aspects of human well-being [25, 61].
In the Piedmont Region, and in Italy in general, ecological and environmental
compensation is an opportunity that has not yet been fully codified as an ordinary
technique in urban and territorial planning. The consideration of positive and negative
effects in the first stages of the decision-making process—in particular during the
revision of municipal plans—is fundamental for raising awareness of the relevance
of the issue, setting priorities in the development of actions and strategies, planning
incentives, and disputes [25]. Few good examples can be found in planning practice,
such as the case of Settimo Torinese (a neighboring municipality of the city of Turin),
where the analysis of ES was integrated during the revision of the municipal plan
[13]. As a result, the revision of the plan was able to identify more sustainable policies
and strategies, define mitigation and compensation measures and effectively reduce
land consumption.
Another approach is the introduction of so-called Payment for Ecosystem Services
(PES). PES is a general term referring to all policy instruments that aim to give market
value to non-market goods and services by developing financial incentives for local
actors, such as voluntary certification, good practices, environmental communica-
tion, among others [26, 49, 59]. The contribution of PES allows decision makers
(DMs) to promote and support the maintenance of the ecological functions offered
by biodiversity and natural capital. The application of PES can be detected all over
the world, such as the Dollars a Day program in Alaska, the sustainable agricultural
practices in the areas of Vittel mineral water region (northeast France), the water
penny tax in Germany, or fire prevention measures in Saint-Tropez [6].
Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic … 205

Increasingly, cities have adopted planning practices to increase the provision of

ES and biodiversity, in particular through the development of green infrastructure
able to preserve natural capital and mitigate the effects of climate change and heat
islands, reduce air, noise, and light pollution. Well-known and recent examples are
the reclamation of river banks and the project of the Jardín del Turia in Valencia,
the High-Line in New York, or the Gardens by the Bay in Singapore. In this context,
the city of Turin has already launched some small initiatives—not comparable to
the previous ones—to promote the diffusion of green areas, such as the reforestation
project of the Basse di Stura area or 1000 trees for Turin. However, these actions are
not enough to achieve a livable and sustainable environment in which to live. Instead,
a complete plan for the diffusion of green infrastructure and the maintenance and
increase of ecosystem services in the city of Turin is needed, as the Green Infrastruc-
ture Plan of New York, for the various benefits that are generated, ranging from the
reduction of water purification and energy costs to emissions, from the improvement
of air quality to the increase in of property values for each additional hectare of urban
green infrastructure.
Moreover, addressing ES in planning practices requires considering at them in
their complex and interdisciplinary nature [16], where ecological, economic, polit-
ical, and social domains of knowledge need to be considered simultaneously [12, 30].
The use of valuation methods and tools to understand the contribution of transforma-
tion projects and planning strategies in terms of benefits and impacts on ecosystems
and their associated services is very rare, especially in our territories.
For this reason, the revision of the Turin PRGC must adopt rigorous evaluation
approaches to measure the impact of its actions and projects on the maintenance
and provision of ES. In this context, the effects upon ES are more evident and
straightforward [23], especially when ES valuation is integrated into management
tools and the SEA. Valuation, as a discipline, can provide tools and methodologies
to endorse a ‘value pluralism’ perspective [25], considering ecological/biophysical
values and economic values, but also socio-cultural ones. If the first two values have
been studied in-depth over time and could be addressed in different ways [48], the
latter are now also an underexplored and promising field of research for assessing a
more comprehensive analysis of ES [9]. In fact, there are several tools for quantifying
biophysical and economic values such as InVEST [56], LIFE + Making Good Natura
[1], and Simulsoil,4 more efforts are needed to include stakeholder preferences,
needs, and expectations [10]. In the complex socio-ecological systems where we
live, we need to address both the demand and supply sides, in the sense that ES are
delivered (supply) in response to stakeholder needs (demand). How stakeholders can
benefit from the ES delivery (supply–demand) is the crucial point, which refers to
the different and divergent stakeholders’ interests, perceptions, uses and demands of
stakeholders for ES [42].

4Simulsoil tool has been developed in the context of the research project Life SAM4CP coordinated
by Politecnico di Torino (prof. Barbieri). More information are available on the project web site:
http://www.sam4cp.eu/simulsoil/.
206 G. Mondini et al.

3.4 Neighbourhood Sustainability Assessment (NSA):

an Overview

The high potential for reducing environmental impacts linked to the construction
sector has meant that since the late 1990s various evaluation systems have been
proposed for the environmental sustainability of buildings. Consequently, various
assessment protocols emerged to gauge sustainability at the building scale, now
widely adopted [44]. Notable certifications include the British “Building Research
Establishment Environmental Assessment Method” (BREEAM), the “Leadership
in Energy and Environmental Design” (LEED) protocol in the United States,
“Green Star” in Australia, “Deutsches Gütesiegel Nachhaltiges Bauen” (DGNB) in
Germany, “Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Effi-
ciency” (CASBEE) in Japan, “Green Mark” in Singapore, and the “Istituto per
l’innovazione e trasparenza degli appalti e la compatibilità ambientale” (ITACA)
(Institute for innovation and transparency of procurement and environmental
compatibility) in Italy [33].
In urban and neighborhood contexts, where different forces and entities influence
the decision-making process, it is essential to add aspects in relation to social and
economic to the sustainability assessment. The integration of multi-dimensional indi-
cators with traditional approaches to assessing sustainability can better assess these
dimensions in the urban context by improving urban sustainability. Recognizing this
need, internationally recognized sustainability protocols have evolved into tools for
assessing environmental, ecological, and social quality in urban settings [29, 64, 72].
Indeed, literature and the regulatory framework have emphasized the importance of
going beyond the scale of the single building and also considering the neighborhood
or city where they arose [46]. Hence, most of the sustainability certification protocols
are therefore extending their scope to conglomerates of buildings, both at the scale of
the district and at the scale of the city. Among the neighborhood and city sustainability
assessment systems, our focus lies on the CASBEE family. CASBEE was created
in 2001 by JSBC [31]. In 2006, the CASBEE Urban Development (CASBEE UD)
system was introduced to assess sustainability at the district/urban level [32]. Unlike
the other evaluation systems mentioned above, CASBEE methods are not based on
a scoring system but on the comparison between required performances and the
resulting environmental loads. Moreover, the integration of evaluation models on
different scales provides more efficient methods and synergies between the build-
ings and other elements that make up the urban fabric (such as public transport and
services), maximizing the benefits deriving in terms of sustainability from different
points of view [55].
The advantages of the CASBEE method are manifold and concern different
aspects of the evaluation, from structuring the problem to the visualization of the
results. The CASBEE-UD system integrates different dimensions of sustainability
(environmental, social, economic and cultural) into the same evaluation model,
proposing an overall vision of the performance of the urban plan [8, 33]. Compared
to other assessment schemes, the CASBEE-UD provides for applying weights of
Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic … 207

the sub-evaluation criteria so as not to have any significant difference between the
impacts of various criteria on the final score. In addition, these weights were defined
by conducting a questionnaire to capture the opinion of experts in the sector using
the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Therefore, the evaluation is based not only
on the opinion of a single analyst but of a focus group bearing the interests of the
community. In terms of social and economic dimensions, the city is a context in
which many stakeholders have a role in the decision-making process. The evalu-
ation dimensions and the weighting of the criteria allow not only to include the
governmental point of view, but also to consider all non-governmental organizations
involved in the decision-making process. The JSBC is committed to involving stake-
holders (industry, government and academia) in the structuring of the CASBEE-UD
by transforming the decision-making process into a participatory process.
Another important aspect is the communication of the evaluation results.
CASBEE-UD has prepared the visualization of the evaluation in three formats
(Fig. 2); the BEEUD graph, a radar diagram that simply indicates the performance of
each main theme; six bar graphs showing the performance of the main sub-themes
of each of the six main themes. The representation of the results in different formats
allows a versatile use of the tool to investigate its performance in its parts and its
entirety.
Despite the breadth of issues considered by the CASBEE-UD assessment model,
certain dimensions of sustainability are not sufficiently addressed, such as sustainable
mobility and the protection of cultural heritage. Nonetheless, the flexibility of the
evaluation model still allows for the integration of flexibility of the methodology,
which allows the implementation and modification of the criteria and indicators,
fostering dialogue among stakeholders [8].
CASBEE methods have undergone continuous revisions to meet the needs and
requests proposed by national and international regulations, intercepting, directly

Fig. 2 CASBEE-UD dashboard [32]

208 G. Mondini et al.

and indirectly, the objectives of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. The building
scale assessment models (CASBEE for New Detached Houses and CASBEE for New
Construction) are closely connected with Goal 12 (Responsible Consumption and
Production), while the urban assessment models (CASBEE-UD and CASBEE for
City), which promotes the sustainable urban planning matching the SDG Goal 11
(Sustainable Cities and Communities) [41]. In this perspective, CASBEE tools are
efficient for obtaining a global vision of sustainability and assessing the degree of
resilience of the project at urban and neighborhood scale.

4 Discussion and Conclusions

This paper analyzed and summarized the main issues, concepts, challenges, and
evaluation tools under investigation, to support the revision of the Municipal Plan of
the City of Turin. Therefore, the PRGC should include sustainability, urban resilience,
ES, and energy transition.
The combination of the concepts of sustainability and urban resilience is helpful
to assess and plan the PRGC, considering the city as a complex and adaptive system
where values and resources must be preserved, enhanced, and managed for both
present and next generations. The PRGC will be able to manage the city within
its multidimensionality and complexity, becoming a dynamic tool that can change
over time in response to the impacts of transformation processes by considering
citizens’ needs. In this sense, to structure the PRGC vision on these principles and
objectives, an iterative process that integrates the evaluation procedure within the
planning phases is necessary. An integrated approach based on a set of indicators
aimed at capturing the effectiveness of urban sustainability and resilience can achieve
this purpose. Firstly, SEA represents a fundamental procedure to support future
actions of plans and programs with the care of the environment. The assessment of
the effects of the Plan and its monitoring guarantee the building of more sustainable
and resilient cities. Moreover, the appraisal discipline offers reliable methodologies
and evaluation techniques to support the SEA process, from the ex-ante to the ex-
post phases. DMs increasingly need these skills to design plans at different territorial
scales [43]. Secondly, the NSA certification protocols, particularly CASBEE-UD,
emerge as suitable tools for the Municipal Plan of Turin to certify the sustainability
of forthcoming urban transformations. CASBEE-UD, known for its adaptability to
different city scales, offers a versatile solution to oversee the governance process of
the entire territory, thereby promoting prudent soil consumption and fostering urban
regeneration efforts.
Concerning the ES, DMs should incorporate into planning practices cognitive and
managerial tools capable of considering both the benefits and impacts of projects and
plans, considering the specificity of each context and the interrelationships at different
(spatial and temporal) scales. In particular, a multi-aspects consideration of ES, which
combines biophysical, monetary, and more intangible values, should be pursued. In
Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic … 209

this context, integrated and mixed approaches can endorse this “value pluralism”
[25], also considering the preferences, needs, and expectations of stakeholders.
Therefore, based on these principles, methodologies, and objectives, the revised
PRGC of Turin could become an inspiring planning model for other municipalities
of Piedmont and the rest of Italy. The integration of all these aspects can deliver a
multidimensional and dynamic Plan that aims to improve sustainability, resilience,
and ES. At the moment, the revision of the Turin PRG is at a preliminary stage, but the
municipality is making great efforts to consider and include these multiple perspec-
tives. The PA has started an intense collaboration and discussion with Politecnico di
Torino to frame and structure all the elements to be considered. This contribution is,
in fact, the result of the first dissertations that had been carried out with them.

Acknowledgements Part of the work illustrated in the present paper has been developed within the
research activities for the Strategic Environmental Assessment of the revision of the Municipal Plan
of Turin (Scientific Coordinator: Prof. Giulio Mondini), which was supported by the Department
of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning—DIST of the Politecnico di Torino.

References

1. Assennato F, De Toni A, Di Leginio M, et al (2015) Azione B1—I servizi ecosistemici del

suolo. Review
2. Assumma V, Bottero M, Mondini G, Zanetta E (2020) An analytic network process (ANP)-
based approach for investigating alternative planning scenarios of mining activities in piedmont
region
3. Bottero M, Mondini G (2009) Valutazione e sostenibilità. Piani, programmi, progetti. CELID,
Torino
4. Brandon PS, Lombardi P (2011) Evaluating sustainable development in the built environment.
Struct Surv 29:14–16. https://doi.org/10.1108/ss.2011.11029bae.008
5. Brunetta G, Ceravolo R, Barbieri CA et al (2019) Territorial resilience: toward a proactive
meaning for spatial planning. Sustain 11:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082286
6. Cancila E, Bosso A, Sabbadini I (2015) Il pagamento dei servizi ecosistemici, casi di studio.
Ecoscienza 1:18–19
7. Cantarello E, Newton AC, Martin PA et al (2017) Quantifying resilience of multiple ecosystem
services and biodiversity in a temperate forest landscape. Ecol Evol 7:9661–9675. https://doi.
org/10.1002/ece3.3491
8. Cappai F, Forgues D, Glaus M (2018) The Integration of socio-economic indicators in the
CASBEE-UD evaluation system: a case study. Urban Sci 2:28. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbans
ci2010028
9. Caprioli C, Bottero M, Mondini G (2020) Urban ecosystem services: a review of definitions
and classifications for the identification of future research perspectives. In: 20th International
conference on computational science and applications (ICCSA 2020)—July 1–4. Cagliari.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58814-4_23
10. Caprioli C, Bottero M, Zanetta E, Mondini G (2021) Ecosystem services in land-use planning:
an application for assessing transformation scenarios at the local scale. In: Bevilacqua C, et al.
E (eds) NMP 2020, SIST 178. Springer Nature Switzerland AG, pp 1–10. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-030-48279-4_124
11. Carbonell J, Sánchez-Esguevillas A, Carro B (2017) From data analysis to storytelling in
scenario building. a semiotic approach to purpose-dependent writing of stories. Futures 88:15–
29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2017.03.002
210 G. Mondini et al.

12. Carpenter SR, Mooney HA, Agard J et al (2009) Science for managing ecosystem services:
beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:1305–1312.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0808772106
13. Città di Settimo Torinese (2017) Variante di Revisione Generale, Proposta Tecnica del Progetto
Preliminare, Relazione Tecnica
14. Città di Torino Piano Di Adattamento Del Pilota, 0–100
15. Costanza R, Mitsch WJ, Day JW (2006) A new vision for New Orleans and the Mississippi delta:
applying ecological economics and ecological engineering. Front Ecol Environ 4(9):465–472.
16. Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J et al (2009) Ecosystem services in decision making: time to
deliver. Front Ecol Environ 7:21–28. https://doi.org/10.1890/080025
17. Desouza KC, Flanery TH (2013) Designing, planning, and managing resilient cities: a
conceptual framework. Cities.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.06.003
18. Elmqvist T, Andersson E, Frantzeskaki N et al (2019) Sustainability and resilience for trans-
formation in the urban century. Nat Sustain 2:267–273. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-
0250-1
19. European Commission (2021) Recovery Plan “Next Generation EU.” https://ec.europa.eu/info/
strategy/recovery-plan-europe_it#nextgenerationeu
20. European Environment Agency (2011) Green infrastructure and territorial cohesion
21. Forrester JW (1987) Lessons from system dynamics modeling. Syst Dyn Rev 3:136–149.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.4260030205
22. Gencer EA (2017) A handbook for local government leaders
23. Geneletti D (2011) Reasons and options for integrating ecosystem services in strategic envi-
ronmental assessment of spatial planning. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 7:143–149.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2011.617711
24. Godschalk DR (2003) Urban hazard mitigation: creating resilient cities. Nat Hazards Rev.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2003)4:3(136)
25. Gómez-Baggethun E, Barton DN (2013) Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban
planning. Ecol Econ 86:235–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019
26. Gómez-Baggethun E, de Groot R, Lomas PL, Montes C (2010) The history of ecosystem
services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes.
Ecol Econ 69:1209–1218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.007
27. Gu C, Ye X, Cao Q et al (2020) System dynamics modelling of urbanization under energy
constraints in China. Sci Rep 10:9956. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66125-3
28. Guan D, Gao W, Su W et al (2011) Modeling and dynamic assessment of urban economy-
resource-environment system with a coupled system dynamics—geographic information
system model. Ecol Indic. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.02.007
29. Holden M (2013) Sustainability indicator systems within urban governance: usability analysis
of sustainability indicator systems as boundary objects. Ecol Indic 32:89–96. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2013.03.007
30. Hubacek K, Kronenberg J (2013) Synthesizing different perspectives on the value of urban
ecosystem services. Landsc Urban Plan 1:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.
10.010
31. Japan Sustainable Building Consortium (2010) Comprehensive assessment system for built
environment efficiency (CASBEE). Japan Sustain Build Consort
32. Japan Sustainable Building Consortium (2014) CASBEE for urban development technical
manual
33. Kaur H, Garg P (2019) Urban sustainability assessment tools: a review. J Clean Prod 210:146–
158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.009
34. Luederitz C, Brink E, Gralla F et al (2015) A review of urban ecosystem services: six key
challenges for future research. Ecosyst Serv 14:98–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.
05.001
35. Maas J, Verheij RA, Groenewegen PP et al (2006) Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong
is the relation? J Epidemiol Community Health. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2005.043125
Planning Sustainable and Resilient Cities: The Role of Strategic … 211

36. Maes J, Zulian G, Günther S, et al (2019) Enhancing resilience of urban ecosystems through
green infrastructure. Final Report. Luxembourg
37. Malczewski J (2006) GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. Int J
Geogr Inf Sci 20:703–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810600661508
38. Masnavi MR, Gharai F, Hajibandeh M (2018) Exploring urban resilience thinking for its
application in urban planning: a review of literature. Int J Environ Sci Technol 16:567–582
39. Meerow S, Newell JP, Stults M (2016) Defining urban resilience: a review. Landsc Urban Plan
147:38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011
40. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Living beyond our means: natural assets and human
well-being statement from the board
41. Miyazaki G, Kawakubo S, Murakami S, Ikaga T (2019) How can CASBEE contribute as
a sustainability assessment tool to achieve the SDGs? IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci
294:012007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/294/1/012007
42. Mouchet MA, Lamarque P, Martín-López B et al (2014) An interdisciplinary methodological
guide for quantifying associations between ecosystem services. Glob Environ Chang 28:298–
308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.07.012
43. Napoli G, Bottero M, Ciulla G et al (2020) Supporting public decision process in buildings
energy retrofitting operations: the application of a multiple criteria decision aiding model to a
case study in Southern Italy. Sustain Cities Soc 60:102214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.
102214
44. Nguyen BK, Altan H (2011) Comparative review of five sustainable rating systems. Procedia
Eng 21:376–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2029
45. Odum E (2007) Fundamentos de Ecologia
46. Orova M, Reith A (2019) Multiscalarity in international sustainable assessment systems: a
qualitative comparison of LEED, CASBEE, BREEAM, DGNB and ESTIDAMA on building,
neighbourhood and city scale. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 290:012056. https://doi.org/10.
1088/1755-1315/290/1/012056
47. Parlamento Italiano (2008) Decreto Legislativo 16 gennaio 2008, n. 4. Ulteriori disposizioni
correttive ed integrative del decreto legislativo 3 aprile 2006, n. 152, recante norme in materia
ambientale. Gazz. Uff. della Repubb. Ital
48. Pascual U, Muradian R, Brander L et al (2012) The economics of valuing ecosystem services
and biodiversity. In: The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic
foundations
49. Redford KH, Adams WM (2009) Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving
nature: editorial. Conserv Biol 23:785–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01271.x
50. Regione Piemonte (1977) Legge regionale 5 dicembre 1977, n. 56. Tutela ed uso del suolo
51. Regione Piemonte (1998) Regional Law 14th December 1998, no. 40. Disposizioni concernenti
la compatibilità ambientale e le procedure di valutazione
52. Sharifi A, Yamagata Y (2014) Resilient urban planning: major principles and criteria. In: Energy
procedia
53. Sharifi A, Yamagata Y (2014) Major principles and criteria for development of an urban
resilience assessment index. In: ICUE 2014
54. Sharifi A, Yamagata Y (2018) Resilience-oriented urban planning. In: Lecture notes in energy,
pp 3–27
55. Sharifi A, Yamagata Y (2016) Principles and criteria for assessing urban energy resilience: a
literature review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 60:1654–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.
03.028
56. Sharp R, Chaplin-Kramer R, Wood S, et al (2018) InVEST user’s Guide
57. Sistema Nazionale per la Protezione dell’Ambiente (2019) Rapporto Consumo di suolo,
dinamiche territoriali e servizi ecosistemici
58. Swanson J (2002) Business dynamics—systems thinking and modeling for a complex world.
J Oper Res Soc 53:472–473. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601336
59. Tacconi L (2012) Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecol Econ 73:29–36. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.09.028
212 G. Mondini et al.

60. Tan Y, Jiao L, Shuai C, Shen L (2018) A system dynamics model for simulating urban sustain-
ability performance: a China case study. J Clean Prod.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.
07.154
61. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity) (2011) TEEB manual for cities:
ecosystem services in urban management. Econ Ecosyst Biodivers
62. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity) (2010) Mainstreaming the economics
of nature : a synsthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB
63. Tetlow MF, Hanusch M (2012) Strategic environmental assessment: the state of the art. Impact
Assess Proj Apprais 30:15–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2012.666400
64. Turcu C (2013) Re-thinking sustainability indicators: local perspectives of urban sustainability
56:695–719. https://doi.org/10.1080/096405682012698984
65. Tyler S, Moench M (2012) A framework for urban climate resilience. Clim Dev
66. Tzoulas K, Korpela K, Venn S, et al (2007) Promoting ecosystem and human health
in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc Urban Plan 81:
167–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.001
67. UNISDR (2012) How to make cities more resilient
68. United Nations (2017) The sustainable development goals report. United Nations Publ. https://
doi.org/10.18356/3405d09f-en
69. United Nations (2016) New Urban Agenda Habitat III: Summary
70. United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable develop-
ment united nations united nations transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable
development. A/RES/70/1. United Nations
71. Vaništa Lazarević E, Keković Z, Antonić B (2018) In search of the principles of resilient
urban design: Implementability of the principles in the case of the cities in Serbia. Energy
Build.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.005
72. Wong SC, Abe N (2014) Stakeholders’ perspectives of a building environmental assess-
ment method: The case of CASBEE. Build Environ 82:502–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
BUILDENV.2014.09.007
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power
Generation? From the Property Tax
on Bolted Systems to the Upheaval
of Compensation for Civic Uses

Manuela Rebaudengo and Riccardo Roscelli

Abstract Civic uses are ancient collective rights to use the land, that people have
exercised in the past, for example by collecting grass, wood, fruits, or fishing or
digging sand: in this manner, from the use of the public areas, they drew their liveli-
hood. In addition to the well-known themes of easements and temporary occupa-
tions of land and buildings, the appraisal theories have also addressed in the past the
problem of civic uses, focusing—in particular—on the determination of the utility
resulting from the practice of civic uses of sowing and grazing and defining how to
calculate the liquidation fee. Since there are fewer and fewer economic resources
available to Local Authorities for services on the territory and since the areas once
dedicated—for example—to grazing and woodland are now sometimes occupied
by infrastructures that are not economically irrelevant (for the production of hydro-
electric energy, for ski facilities for tourist use, etc.), an apparently outdated issue
like that of civic uses has suddenly become popular again. In this direction, some
public administrations have felt entitled to require the payment of large amounts of
previous fees, in an attempt to demonstrate—in many cases without evidence—the
existence—in the past—of civic uses on land granted now—in a costly way—for the
exercise of functions different from the traditional ones. It is certainly less unpop-
ular to tax a few large subjects, which often have high revenues and which, for their
convenience, always tend to find an agreement with the territory, rather than with
the community in a widespread manner. However, the question arises—even in the
face of the case of the former local property tax on “bolted” installations—whether
it is correct to distort the concept of compensation for civic use with only an obvious
need for “cash making”, if and how to differentiate the civic use for grazing from that
for more valuable activities and, also, how to “distribute” this annual contribution
in a wider territorial context than just the municipal one. This paper investigates an

M. Rebaudengo (B)
Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Politecnico di
Torino, Turin, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
R. Roscelli
ITHACA Information Technology for Humanitarian Assistance, Cooperation and Action, Turin,
Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 213
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_15
214 M. Rebaudengo and R. Roscelli

operational context in which the evaluation should bring order amongst special and
particular values and presents the issue of civic uses, dealing in particular with the
case of a hydroelectric power station. Assuming the existence of civic uses on land
used for the production of energy, it deals with the determination of compensation
for occupation (past and future), developing some scenarios more or less favourable
to the two parties (public and private).

Keywords Civic uses · Compensation fee · Hydroelectric power production ·

Local taxes

1 Civic Uses: A Theme Still Relevant?

In the past, the assessment of real rights has been much studied, referring in partic-
ular to the themes of easements, expropriations, exclusive enjoyment rights [10, 15,
17] but also to civic uses, focusing—in particular—on their nature, on their utility
deriving from sowing and grazing [2, 9] and on the definition of criteria and methods
for the calculation of the liquidation fee [19].
Civic uses are particular limitations to the right to property of very ancient origin
which consist in a sort of right to use, always in kind, by populations, or members of a
given community, agricultural land belonging to individuals, municipalities or agri-
cultural communities or associations [15]. These are ancient rights—in nature [19]—
that populations have exercised, for example, by collecting grass, wood, fruits, or by
fishing or digging sand: in this way, private individuals have drawn their livelihood
from the use of areas not owned by them.
According also to international experts [1, 4, 7, 11], civic uses represented the
right that the populations had to carry out their agricultural activity in feudal estates
to draw the necessary means for their life. With time, feudality has been gradually
replaced by the modern middle class (small and medium landowners, professionals,
clerks, artisans, etc.) and at the same time, the individualisation of private property
has been replacing the complex form of common property [6].
According to Polelli [19], then, they fall within collective property and should
be understood as the exercise of the right to use owed to a community of people on
public or private land; at the end of the 1920s, he came to believe that civic uses had
lost much of their economic content and constituted “a cumbersome burden of land
ownership”, whose agricultural progress was halted and limited marketability.
It follows that progress in modern social environment has highlighted the anachro-
nism of these uses and the damage resulting from them; and that, therefore, it has
tried and is trying to suppress them. But it cannot take place without compensation
because the civic uses, being inscribed, always express—as already observed—the
control that in ancient times people exercised over the land for absolute necessity
and for the needs of the times.
With particular reference to the purposes of exercise, the civic uses can be divided
into two classes: essential uses, i.e., those where personal service is necessary for vital
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation? From the Property … 215

needs; useful uses, i.e. those that mainly include character and purpose of industry.
The first class includes the rights to graze and water one’s livestock, collect wood
for domestic use or personal work, sow as payment to the owner. Belonging to the
second class, together with the previous one or only as the second, are “the rights to
collect or draw from the fund other products that can be traded […]; and in general,
the rights to use the fund in order to obtain economic benefits, which exceed those
necessary for personal and family sustenance” [9].
As regards, in particular, the calculation of the compensation (i.e. the amounts to
be paid for the occupation of areas of the civic property), [9] reports that the cited law
of June 16, 1927 n. 1766, states that the compensation for the liquidation of civic uses
must normally consist of a portion of the burdened fund and that this compensation
must be determined on the basis of two criteria: that of the extension and that of the
value of the fund. The same author states that it is therefore not possible to make
a correct assessment of the compensation for the liquidation of civic uses based on
the utilities that the users derived from the exercise of these uses “because the utility
resulting from the exercise of civic uses of sowing and grazing and civic uses in
general, depended more than anything else on the simplicity of life and frugality of
the users, the limited number of them and the style of feudal times. With particular
regard to the issue of the payment for civic uses, the author specifies that as a general
rule, the said consideration must be constituted by a portion of land. Exceptionally,
this portion of land is converted into an annual fee,so the task of the expert is the
following: first of all, he has to determine the fee as a portion of land (;) and then, he
has to determine the amount of the annual fee.
Polelli as well refers to the same estimation procedure (2008): “in the case of the
release of the civic uses the compensation can be established as equal to a portion of
the land or based on the annual fee”.
It is clear that, given the clarity of the rule (compensation linked to the extension
of the land and its value—[9, 19] and the simplicity of calculation [9], the opera-
tional practice sees the application of methodologies widely known and used in the
appraisal field and mentioned above. Finally, it is considered appropriate to point
out Polelli’s own in-depth study on the subject of estimation for the legitimation of
state land occupations. “The occupation by private individuals of state land can be
admitted, even if abusive, if the occupation has brought substantial and permanent
improvements, lasting at least 10 years and the occupied area does not interrupt the
continuity of the land. Granting the legitimation, a lease of emphyteutic nature will
be applied in favour of the Municipality, whose capital corresponds to the value of the
same fund, decreased by that of the improvements and increased by at least 10 years
of interest”. The fee (F) is thus calculated through the expression:

F = [(M V a − V I ) + 10 · (M V a − V I ) · r ]

where VMa is the asset market value; VI is the value of the improvements; r is the
legal interest rate; 10(VMa—VI)·r is the total interest for ten years.
How widespread was the phenomenon of civic uses in Italy in the past? According
to Medici [13, 14], in those years the distribution of civic uses in Italy was equal
216 M. Rebaudengo and R. Roscelli

to a little more than 11% of the entire national territory and mainly concerned the
Alpine region (about 27% of the entire territory), the central part of the Apennines
(about 11% of the corresponding territory) and large portions of central-southern
Italy (Lazio, Sicily, …).
In an essay of 1962 [5], Cinanni—analysing the data of the National Institute
of Agricultural Economics referred to 1947—distinguishes the 3 million hectares
of land subject to civic use, in municipal state property (the assets under civic use,
belonging to the population of municipalities, form the collective property of the
population) and agricultural associations (at the time 2,255 in Italy), as reported in
Table 2. Subsequent studies have shown that “demographic pressure, especially in
areas close to the cities, forced the ploughing of common grasslands and woods”
(Bagioli 2007) and that, for example in Piedmont, between the years 1680 and 1717,
18.6% of common property was privatised.
For what reasons should there still exist, even today, civic uses on public land, if
the agricultural and pastoral activities that have generated the need for them are now
fewer? Although a collapse in the number of farms and a decrease in agricultural
land are detectable [20], there are other—today—activities of a commercial nature
that can be carried out in the macro-areas listed in Table 1 above, such as the use
of water resources for the production of hydroelectric power, lifting systems for
tourist activities, etc. The proposed application concerns more precisely the case of a
private company with headquarters and activity prevalent in a mountain municipality
in the Piedmont Alps, which has been required by the municipal council to settle the
payment of fees for the occupation of land under civic use. Therefore, regardless of
the reasons (historical, legal and formal, which in this specific case will exclude—as
we will see—the existence of any civic use, past, present and future), that determine/
confirm the existence of civic uses on mountain lands [18, 21], the paper analyses
the issue of the fairness of the required fees, first of all with references to national
and regional regulations, in order to determine a monetary value to regularise past
and future fees.
In legal terms, the topic here explored is still regulated by the old state law n.
1766 of 1927, by a conversion into law of Royal Decree of May 22, 1924, n. 751,
concerning the reorganisation of civic uses in the State. This rule divided the rights

Table 1 Extent of civic uses

Province Hectares % over total land
in Italy in 1947 (source:
http://www.collective-action. Alp region 1,733,720 27.4
info/_TYP_COM_ITA_Data) Po Valley 23,357 1.2
Northern Apennines 100,888 2.2
Central Apennines 285,815 10.8
Lazio 168,208 12.1
Southern Italy 386,692 6.3
Sicily 44,534 1.8
Italy 3,085,028 11.1
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation? From the Property … 217

Table 2 Extension of collective property in Italy in 1947 [16]

Year Collective assets [areas in ha]
Public property Landowner’s association Total
1947 2,596,236 488,792 3,085,028

of civic use into two categories (Article 4): “essential” and “useful”. Essential are
those intended to ensure what is necessary for families to live (“if the personal
exercise is recognised as necessary for the vital needs “; useful if able to ensure not
only the simple subsistence and with a prevalent economic purpose (“if they include
predominantly character and purpose of industry”).
In the 70 s, with a series of measures culminating in the Presidential Decree 616
of 1977, the State has decentralised many administrative functions to the Regions,
among which the competence on the civic uses.
Subsequently, the Regional Government then proceeded to issue the Regional
Government Resolution on the conciliation procedures n. 5–2484 of 29.07.2011 n.
29. According to this document, out-of-court conciliation proceedings in matters
of civic uses may be concluded according to the following economic parameters:
(a) determination of the market value of the involved asset; (b) determination of
compensation for the non-use of the asset by the local community, for the previous
occupation; (c) determination of compensation for the withdrawal or impairment
of natural resources during the previous occupation of the asset; (d) deduction, in
the case of rented assets, of the fees paid; (e) abatement of 80% on what is due for
previous rents; (f) deduction of the price paid to the municipality for the alienation
resulted null; (g) deduction of the expenses for improvements; (h) abatement of 65%
on the sum resulting from the calculation as per letter (a) above deducted of the sums
previewed at letters (f) and (g) above; (i) deduction of the local property tax.

2 The Case Study

A company is the owner of a hydroelectric power plant located in the north-west of the
Alps, consisting (in summary) of intake works, loading, production plant, tunnels and
cast iron pipes exploiting a hydraulic leap developing over 500 m. During extraordi-
nary maintenance work on the assets, the local administration has requested compen-
sation for past fees for about 100 years, claiming the existence of an assumed civic
use on the land on which, they insist,—more specifically—lays the infrastructure
related to the power plant in question. To get the full picture of the situation, it must
however be underlined that with the (recent) sentence n. 2/2020 of the Commissioner
for the liquidation of the Civic Uses for Piedmont, Aosta Valley and Liguria, the inex-
istence of civic uses and community rights on the funds acquired by the Company in
1923 is—on the one hand—motivated and—on the other hand—validated the deed
of sale.
218 M. Rebaudengo and R. Roscelli

There are no recent studies that territorially locate the presence and the extent
of civic uses, not even on a regional scale. In Piedmont, the civic uses assessment
and census process—that has involved Region and Municipalities—has been long,
complex and, in many cases, has not reached full completion (Table 3); this means
that, except for those Local Authorities that have completed the historical analysis
and that have a formal act (decree) confirming the non-existence or presence of civic
uses on the municipal territory (16% in the first case, 57% in the second), in the
other cases (27%) we are in the presence of a situation still being assessed or to be
investigated.
The existence of civic uses on the land covered by the power plant and the
pipelines, and consequently the occupation of property without a valid title, raise
thus the question of what is the amount of the fee to be paid to the Local Authority
shall be, both to settle the previous situation and for the future.
For the sake of clarity, it must be said that (i) the local municipality involved in this
case study is not in possession of any decrees or other formal acts that establish with
certainty the existence of civic use on its territory; (ii) the amount of the request (for
the settlement of the past 100 years) is about 2 Me; (iii) the calculation procedure
is based on the profits of the company and not on the value of the assets charged by
civic use.
If it is true that civic uses were created with the aim of protecting the private use
of common goods and not to generate income because they are linked to agricultural
exploitation, is it possible that today such topic is becoming popular again, with the
only purpose of “cash making”? It is certainly less unpopular to “tax” a few large
subjects, which often have good revenues (in recent years, in fact, the production of
energy from renewable sources has grown only thanks to the production of hydro-
electric energy), and which, conveniently, always tend to find an understanding with
the territory, rather than the community in a widespread manner. In any case—in

Table 3 Civic uses statistics in Piedmont (Piedmont Region, 2018)

Province Local LM with LM with civic LM with Conditions to
municipalities civic uses uses other acts, be defined
[LM] existence investigation without
decree decree civic uses
decree
Alessandria 190 76 87 7 20 40%
Asti 118 34 83 0 1 29%
Biella 82 21 41 10 10 26%
Cuneo 250 15 181 37 17 6%
Novara 88 24 40 19 5 27%
Torino 315 12 168 69 66 4%
Verbania 77 0 38 32 7 0%
Vercelli 86 8 52 14 12 9%
Total 1,206 16% 57% 16% 11% 0%
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation? From the Property … 219

the hypothesis of the existence of civic uses on occupied land without adequate title
(deed of sale), the question arises—even in the face of the case of the former local
property tax on “bolted” installations [12]—whether it is correct to distort the concept
of compensation for civic uses and if so, whether and how to differentiate (even in
the way the compensation is calculated) the civic use for grazing from that for more
valuable activities.

3 What Compensations, Today, for Civic Uses?

3.1 Determining a Fair Value for a Mediation Proposal

The contents of Regional Law 29/2009 and those of the aforementioned Regional
Government Resolution (RGR) n. 5–2484, which necessarily refer to national legisla-
tion, in outlining the procedure for the determination of employment benefits clearly
refer to estimation procedures based on the value of the assets; the valuation prac-
tice followed by the Local Administration, on the other hand, is based on different
assumptions and, at least for the most significant part and from an economic point
of view, referred to the gross profits of the activity carried out by the Company. This
does not apply in theory, nor methodologically, and has never been applied to the
case history of real facts for the economic evaluation of any civic use. In fact, we
can intuitively understand how a valuation reference to gross profit would lead to an
abnormal, improper and additional taxation with respect to those already formally due
(corporate income tax, regional and municipal surcharges, concession charges…),
which is absolutely anomalous in the case of loss-making financial reports.
Referring to internationally evaluation methods and the Italian evaluation practice,
it should be remembered that the basic rules of real estate appraisal can be traced back
to three fundamental approaches: market approach (or market comparison method),
cost approach (or cost method) and income capitalisation approach (or financial
method). In the first two cases, the value of the asset can be determined by comparison
or through the values of other similar assets; in the last case, however, we proceed
through the capitalisation of income, i.e. determining the value of the asset as the
ratio between the net operating income generated by the property and a capitalisation
rate that reflects specific conditions of risk/return of real estate investments [3]. Also
in terms of expropriation and evaluation of compensation (for occupation, easement,
…) the procedures provide that the economic parameters of reference are linked to the
value of the asset (which one must be expropriated, which is temporarily occupied,
burdened by easement, …).
Following the strict interpretation of the original law (Law of 16 June 1927 n.
1766), the fee is calculated from the (agricultural) value of the land:
“[…] 5. The payment fee is established in a portion of the charged land or of the
part of the charged land to be assigned to the Municipality, in whose territory the
land itself is located, and which will be determined in the following way. […].
220 M. Rebaudengo and R. Roscelli

Table 4 Average agricultural

Culture type Average agricultural value
values of the specific case
study Grazing 1,250 e/ha
Fallow 599 e/ha
Woods 1,722 e/ha

6. The land portion to be allocated in compensation for the civic fees to be paid
will have to be determined not only by the criterion of its extension but also by that
of its value. To this end, the commissioner may order an expert’s report. […].
10. In granting the authorisation referred to in the previous article, the commis-
sioner will impose on the used property and in favour of the Municipality or the
association a lease fee, whose amount corresponds to the value of the property itself,
reduced by the value of the improvements, with at least 10 years of interest: this
increase will not be imposed, if the occupant has already paid a benefit both in kind
and in money. This fee may be lower when the occupier may have benefited of the
quotation. […]”.
Polelli as well, in his 2008 Manual, takes up this formulation.
The land value corresponds, as confirmed also by the subsequent regional regu-
latory references (Regulation and DGR-verify), to the Average Agricultural Value
(AAV) available for each crop and Agricultural Region and can be inferred from
the Provincial Table 4 now also available on the website of the Real Estate Market
Observatory of Agenzia delle Entrate (former Italian Land Register).
Since these values can be taken as a reference in case of sale and purchase of
similar goods, in order to determine the fee to be paid, so that it is equal to the market
value of the asset, it is necessary to refer in more detail to the estimation process
called income approach, which calculates the market value of an asset, the future
income withdrawable over time being known, according to the formula: CV = a/i.
For the purposes of this assessment, the formula will be applied in reverse, i.e.: the
market value of the asset (CV, Capitalisation Value, according to the income approach
method) being known, you will get the retractable future income (a) by multiplying
CV by an appropriate capitalisation rate (i). In this specific case, CV is equal to the
AAV of the land and i has been assumed to be equal to the average profitability of
the reference market (4,74%). This percentage, obtained from a survey carried out
by INEA, National Institute of Agricultural Economics, on more than 2.000 farms in
Italy [8], is certainly more advantageous for the Municipality than the 3% (minimum)
that the regional reference legislation indicates.
The values referred to in Table 5 are per hectare and, for the sole purpose of
facilitating a possible conciliation proposal towards the Municipality, have been
multiplied by 3, as it would be a case of expropriation of agricultural land for public
utility; in this way, we reach an annual fee referring to the year 2018, already tripled,
equal to 324.71 e/ha. The figure is obtained starting from an average agricultural
value of 2,285 e/ha (forest, year 2018), capitalised at 4.74% instead of the 3%
referred to in the RGR mentioned above.
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation? From the Property … 221

Table 5 Annual yields for different crops in the same agricultural region of reference
Culture type Grazing Culture Type Fallow Culture Type Woods
% of use 100% % of use 100% % of use 100%
Size 10,000 mq Size 10,000 mq Size 10,000 mq
Average 1,250 e/ha Average 599 e/ha Average 1,722 e/ha
agricultural value agricultural value agricultural value
Capitalization 4.74% Capitalization 0.47% Capitalization 4.74%
rate (i) rate (i) rate (i)
Future income (a) 59.25 e Future income (a) 2.82 e Future income (a) 81.64 e

Since payments should be referring to the time when they were generated, the
calculation was made with reference to individual years using the FOI index time
series and applying an annual compound interest determined on the basis of the
average of historical data (ISTAT). Therefore, in order to determine the indemnities
for civic use referring to the entire period 1924–2018, the following indemnities
would be defined, again per hectare and with values already tripled:
Compensation for the period 1924–2018 (rate 4.74%) = 40,899.45 e
Compensation according to RGR 5–2484 (minimum rate 3%) = 30,847.50 e

3.2 The Fee Calculation According to Recent Regional

Regulations

In October 2018, the Piedmont Region has better specified the reference legisla-
tion: Regional Government Resolution n. 17–7645, which defines in a more precise
manner than in the past the economic parameters for out-of-court settlements, has
in fact replaced the previous Regional Government Resolution (RGR), n. 5–2484 of
2011, whose contents the technician appointed by the City Council referred to.
The resolution refers to some economic parameters, establishing the method to
calculate, in successive steps, the compensation for past occupation in the time period
between 1924 (the time limit imposed by regional legislation) and the estimation time,
as shown below.
With reference to the numerical data shown in Table 6, it is first necessary to
calculate the Land Reference Value (V2), obtained as the arithmetic mean of the
market value of the land (V3) and its agricultural value (V4). The RGR states that in
any case the market value cannot be less than 15% of the value of the built structures.
In the specific case study, the market value (V3) changed over time due to the works
carried out by the company in 1954, going from V3 (1) (300,000 e) for the occupation
period from 1924 to 1954 and V3 (2) (480,000 e) for the following period.
222 M. Rebaudengo and R. Roscelli

Table 6 Application of RGR 17–7645: determination of compensation and assessment of the

transfer fee (period 1924–2018)
Economic parameters out-of-court Values
conciliations
point nr. Land reference value V2 (1) = MEAN( V3 (1); V4) = e 151,238 [Land
2) RGR rfeference value from 1924 to 1953]
= Arithmetic mean of market V2 (2) = MEAN ( V3 (2); V4) = e 241,238 [Land
value and agricultural value reference value from 1954 to 2018]
point nr. Market value, net of V3 (1) = 15% (VB a) = e 300,000 [Value from
3) RGR improvements, 1924 to 1953]
= ART. 31 REGional V3 (2) = 15%(VB b) = e 480,000 [Value from
regulation (8/R 27.06.2016) 1954 to 2018]
According to evaluation rules
Value, including VB (a) 2,000,000 cost of reconstruction without
improvements, tunnel
> = 15% Value of buildings
[VB]
point nr. Agricultural value, net of V4 = 2,476.00 e (2 ha ca)
4) RGR improvements,
= Average agricultural value Year 2017 agricultural region nr.1 =1,238 e/ha
(culture type: grazing)
point nr. Previous employment
6) RGR compensation =
Compensation (point 7) +
possible compensation (point
9)
– any fees paid (point
10)—counter value of benefits
for the
collectivity (point 11) V7 = V7 (1) + V7 (2) = e 606,528
80% lowered result (Can be V7low = V7 (1–80%) = e 121,306 previous use
increased up to 90%) compensation
V7low = V7 (1–90%) = e 60,653 previous use
compensation
point nr. Compensation = value in point V7 (1) = V2 (1) x years (1) × 3% = e 136,114
7) RGR 2) by number of years
AND for interest > = 3% V7 (2) = V2 (2) x years (2) × 3% = e 470,414
point nr. Occupation not before 1924 years (1) = 30 [From 1924 to the construction of
8) RGR the tunnel]
years (2) = 65 [From tunnel construction to 2018]
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation? From the Property … 223

The agricultural value (V4), on the other hand, is calculated at approximately

2,500 e, estimating the value it would have if it had kept its original agro-sylvo-
pastoral use. This gives a value (V2) of about 151,000 in the first 30 years of
occupation and 241,000 in the following 65 years.
According to the same method, then, in order to determine the compensation for
the non-use by the local community, the reference value (V2) is multiplied by the
number of years of occupation (30 + 65) and by an interest rate of at least 3%.
This amount (about 606,000 e, sum of V7(1) and V7(2)) is then reduced by 80%,
which the municipality can justifiably increase to 90% if the party concluding the
conciliation undertakes to use the asset for activities that guarantee employment and
economic benefits, direct or indirect, for the local community.
Applying the procedure in a completely uncritical way with respect to some
important estimation issues (for example the reduction of the economic value of the
goods over time—totally ignored in the text—and the incidence of the value of the
areas with respect to the value of the goods built on them—which has no specific
references in the estimation discipline), we obtain a total amount of 121,306 e. If we
consider, then, the possibility contemplated by the RGR, i.e. that the Municipality
can increase the share of reductions, taking into account the possible improvements
made to the areas and the benefits brought to the community—which are neglected
in this calculation—, we obtain a total of about 61,000 e.

4 Conclusions

As seen in the example here shown, the element—this being quite an incredible fact
because industrial activities are already taxed on income produced in various ways,
both nationally and locally—having the greatest influence on the Public Administra-
tion’s assessment is the assumption that the allowance is calculated as a percentage
of gross profit related to the company’s annual financial results, as an “additional”
element for the determination of compensation for civic uses that is not reflected in
the assessment rules, nor—in the meantime—in the most recent regional clarifica-
tions (October 2018) on the specific issue and on the definition of the possible price
for the sale of assets (of the areas) subject to the constraint.
Public Administrations have shown a similar attitude in the past years—as
mentioned before—also on the calculation of the property tax on bolted systems,
without considering the general issue already mentioned—of the effects on the terri-
tory of the economic benefits acquired, in the sense of a wider redistribution than
that limited to the municipal borders [12].
Finally, it should be noted that the compensation amounts calculated in accordance
with the most recent reference legislation, applied—without making any mention of
the parameters identified for the calculation—on the basis of the latest regional
clarifications, are consistent—in terms of orders of magnitude—with the values of
assets burdened by civic use, i.e. land. Among other things, it should be pointed out
how these results have been reached in a conciliation perspective, using—also in the
224 M. Rebaudengo and R. Roscelli

proposal—indicators that are completely favourable to the Municipal Administration

(for example, tripling the average agricultural values and using a profitability rate
that is higher than the minimum rate indicated at regional level).

References

1. Blomley N (2008) Enclosure, common right and the property of the poor. Social Legal Studies
17:311–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663908093966
2. Bevilacqua P (ed) (1992) Storia dell’Agricoltura Italiana in Età Contemporanea, Uomini e
Classi 2. Venezia: Marsilio Editori
3. Bravi M, Prizzon F, Rebaudengo M, Taccone G, Talarico A (2014) L’estimo immobiliare e i
modelli valutativi, in: Roscelli R. (a cura di) Manuale di Estimo. Valutazioni economiche ed
esercizio della professione, De Agostini—UTET Università, ISBN: 9788860084293
4. Chatterton P (2010) Seeking the urban common: furthering the debate on spatial justice. City
14(6):625–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2010.525304
5. Cinanni P (1962) Le terre degli Enti, gli usi civici e la programmazione economica, Alleanza
Nazionale dei Contadini, Roma
6. Cristoferi D (2016) Da usi civici a beni comuni: gli studi sulla proprietà collettiva nella
medievistica e nella modernistica italiana e le principali tendenze internazionali. Studi Storici
57(3):577–604
7. Foster S (2011) Collective action and the urban commons. Notre Dame Law Review 87: 57,
Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol87/iss1/2
8. Gioia M, Mari F (2012) A cura di, Il valore della terra. Un contributo alla conoscenza del
mercato italiano dei terreni agricoli attraverso i dati della RICA, INEA
9. Gisondi M (1933) La stima del compenso per la liquidazione degli usi civici, Hoepli, Milano
10. Grillenzoni M, Grittani G (1994) Estimo. Teoria, procedure di valutazione, casi applicativi,
Calderini, Bologna; 551–619
11. Holder JB, Flessas T (2008) Emerging commons. Soc Leg Stud 17(3):299–310. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0964663908093965
12. Ingaramo L, Roscelli R (2010) La rendita catastale dei sistemi di produzione di energia elet-
trica: il valore medio costante, in Patrignani C., Bonardi G. (a cura di), Energie alternative e
rinnovabili, IPSOA INDICITALIA
13. Medici G (1948) Proprietà collettive, demani, usi civici, in Rivista di economia agraria,
Edagricole, Bologna; 260
14. Medici G (1948) La distribuzione della proprietà fondiaria in Italia: Relazione generale, vol. I
e II, INEA, Roma
15. Micheli I, Michieli M (2002), Trattato di estimo. Valutazioni finanziarie, legali, urbane, rurali,
industriali, catastali e ambientali, Edagricole, Bologna; 267
16. Oliverio FS (2018) Verso una nuova definizione degli usi civici, Agriregionieuropa 14, n
55; available on line at: https://agriregionieuropa.univpm.it/it/content/article/31/55/verso-una-
nuova-definizione-degli-usi-civici (ultimo accesso 20/06/2019)
17. Orefice M (1984) Estimo, Utet. Torino 213–217:279–296
18. Pallottino G (2011) Proprietà collettive e usi civici, Scienze de l Territorio, Firenze University
Press, ISSN 2284–242X (online), n. 1, 2013, pp 433–438
19. Polelli M (2008) Nuovo trattato di estimo—II edizione, Maggioli ed., S. Arcangelo di Romagna
(RN); PARTE II pag. 191–296
How to Cash in on Hydroelectric Power Generation? From the Property … 225

20. Spinelli L, Fanfani R (2012) L’evoluzione delle aziende agricole italiane attraverso
cinquant’anni di censimenti (1961–2010), Agriregionieuropa anno 8, n 31; available online
at: https://agriregionieuropa.univpm.it/it/content/article/31/31/levoluzione-delle-aziende-agr
icole-italiane-attraverso-cinquantanni-di (ultimo accesso 20/06/2019)
21. Tagliapietra C (2011) Charters, partnerships and natural resources: two cases of endogenous
regulation in Italy. Econ Aff 31(2):30–35
Past, Present and Future: From
Evaluation to Project Validation

Giovanna Acampa and Giorgia Marino

Abstract The paper focuses on the evolution in time of evaluation methodologies

and their application; its aim is to provide a frame for spreading their implementation
in the design process. In the 60s, they were only used in USA for social and residential
housing, and later, in the 90s also in the European Community for territorial planifi-
cation and government policies. Until now, the real potential of these methodologies
has been applied only in few cases such as housing construction by means of Qualitel,
HQI, Level(s) or social welfare with Well certification. Due to the increasing spread of
BIM (Building Information Modelling), that brings to a technological change based
on a different use of the available information, the evaluation process may become
part of any design process. Within this scope, Model Checking already enables to
check and validate 3D models by controlling interferences (Clash Detection) and
coherences with existing rules (Code Checking). The next step, which is a future
challenge for the researchers in our discipline, is to develop plug-ins capable to meet
the requirements set by designers and stakeholders.

Keywords Evaluation · Validation · BIM · Model checking · Quality

1 Introduction

Nowadays, quality is becoming increasingly important in every economic field and

has become a central issue also in the construction sector. Setting correctly the tools
necessary to evaluate and control buildings, is a challenging operation as parameters
of different type must be defined to assess quality [33]. At present, with Building
Information Modelling (BIM) tools, whose use is gaining momentum, the verifica-
tion and measurement of pre-established standards can be carried out without any

G. Acampa (B) · G. Marino

Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Kore University of Enna, Enna, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
G. Marino
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 227
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_16
228 G. Acampa and G. Marino

delay1 [1, 11]. In particular, these tools dictate an interdisciplinary approach in order
to guarantee a strong interaction between architectural, structural-plant and environ-
mental systems [39]. Nevertheless, using these tools the risk of losing the general
overview is higher and this can lead to validate designs having a very poor overall
quality.
The paper core aim is to expose the chronological and methodological evaluation
systems evolution applied to:
• planning and programming between the 60s and 90s;
• architectural quality between the 90s and 2000s;
• technological systems with the new concept of validation until today.
In the last section, researchers’ efforts are oriented towards the development of
plug-ins2 that fit the actual necessity for reliable and effective results of quality
validation [6, 15].
Plug-ins appropriately developed, will allow to carry out controls now not avail-
able on the pre-configured products and to include them in BIM systems for quality
assessment leaving more freedom to the designer to set them according to his own
approach to quality.

2 The Evaluation Methods

2.1 Plans and Programs Evaluation

A wide shared need to give a universal evaluation procedure in the planning

and designing sector dates back to the 1960s. Through the years, we can mainly
distinguish three periods according to the trends [7, 23, 32, 34]:
• The first, developed in the USA, had its apex from mid-60s to mid-70s and is
called “programme optimism and evaluation optimism”. Reform programmes and
social experimentation following the War on Poverty made compulsory by law the
application of evaluation methodologies. This way, the “positivist-experimental”
approach was born, by which it is crucial to assess the impact of programmes
according to an appropriate methodology [20]. The task of the evaluation is to test
and prove a hypothesis by estimating its efficiency and effectiveness. Realist eval-
uation identifies, questions and tests the mechanisms or hypotheses that explain

1 BIM acronym refers to the digital representation of the building process that permits the inter-
change and interoperability of information in a digital format (Eastman 1999). As well, the UK
Construction Project Information Committee defines BIM as «a digital representation of physical
and functional characteristics of a facility creating a shared knowledge resource for information
about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life cycle, from earliest conception to
demolition».
2 A plug-in is an additional software tool that can be integrated in the BIM platform, that allows to

interact with all the program native features and make the model evaluation process more intuitive.
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 229

how outcomes are generated/prevented and the context impacts. An intervention

works or does not work depending on how people react (or do not react) to the
opportunities provided by the intervention. To this end, the models used consist
of before/after observations of different “experimental groups” to which the input
is administered. It represents the testing ‘sample’ of the project hypothesis. The
main limitation of this approach is that it is incapable of perceiving undesirable
effects.
• The second, widespread in industrialised countries and based on an opposite
approach, was popular from mid-70s to around mid-80s, and is called “programme
pessimism and clash on evaluation”. The negative effects due to bad welfare poli-
cies pushed evaluators to focus the attention of the governments on the implemen-
tation process and on the impact of the environment. Consequently, New Public
Management (NPM) was created and developed for the first time in Australia and
New Zealand. It deals with issues such as health care, education, public sector
reform policies or performance evaluations of services or institutions. In this
period, the positivist-experimental approach was changed and the pragmatist of
quality approach adopted. It holds Evaluation as a mean to manage organisational
procedures ensuring that pre-defined standards are achieved. Yet, this approach
refers to management systems and standards and, regarding quality, it was meant
to apply ISO 9000 system, which was created with the aim to standardize the
production of products and private services.
• The third period, which developed in all countries from mid-80s onwards, is
called “programme decomposition and evaluation pluralism”. Thanks to some
inputs given by large entities such as the EU or the World Bank, many coun-
tries have introduced some principles of NPM. Evaluation is now considered as
an activity that refers to a social process and takes place in a political context.
Stakeholders, administrators and beneficiaries take their decision by means of
evaluation that represent a new parameter that must to be taken into account. This
way, the “constructivist of the social process” approach was born, by which it
is important to use ‘active’ listening and dialogue oriented to the exploration on
social phenomena with reference to changing and local ‘frames’ of knowledge.
It will tend to understand the situation through the different interpretations given
by its actors. recognising in social interaction an opportunity to discover values
and develop meaning [21].
Side-by-side with this timeline analysis, we can also classify evaluations from
a methodological point of view, breaking them down into two macro categories
Evidence-based and Practice-based [25]:
(a) Evidence-Based. Procedures belonging to this category are based on scientific
processes operating according to the cause-effect logic. The analysis is carried
out in a “Top-down” mode, i.e. is promoted by Administrations or entities that
finance the project. The evaluator position is external and compares the fore-
casted results with what was achieved in reality. The approaches belonging to
this category are:
230 G. Acampa and G. Marino

– Positivist-experimental: it is designed to tackle serious social problems

(unemployment, urban decay, crime). An accurate goals schedule and reli-
able tools to analyse the expected results are the necessary conditions for
performing the evaluation. In spite of its limitations, this approach continues
to be considered the most suitable, both in public investment programmes
and in social or European programmes which are formulated in terms of
input (cost items; axes-measures-actions) and outputs (results).
– Pragmatist of quality: the importance of comparison and the definition of
criterion is enhanced. The evaluator is external to the programme and he/she
must not be influenced by the objectives: his/her judgement has to be based
only on comparing values that are quantifiable objectively. This approach
exploits methodologies such as “Delphi groups, Nominal Group Technique”,
which seems easy and feasible, but also has the defect of rigidity: it is neces-
sary to find mechanisms for continuous adjustment of standards, since the
needs of users and of a service continuously evolve.
(b) Practice-Based: is a procedure that stems from the social interaction. The anal-
ysis is carried out in a “Bottom-up” mode: the final goal comes to light owing
to the evaluator’s activity which is an integral part of the procedure. Reality
is difficult to predict and so, it becomes important to evaluate unexpected
effects. Therefore, the evaluator is pushed to devote particular attention in what
a programme becomes while it is being implemented. The approach belonging
to this category is:
– Constructivist of the social process: it holds evaluation as an interpretative
process to understand what the object of the evaluation is, by hearing the
various stakeholders’ opinion. It assumes that problems and cultural differ-
ences in a specific evaluation design, require a certain ‘sensitivity’ on the
part of the evaluator. Challenges and diversity are considered as “conceptual
organisers” of evaluation as an interactive practice. This type of evaluation
generally, is used in education to face multiculturalism, integration, forms of
cultural hybridity and gender issue.
Each approach is a particular way of understanding what evaluation is; evaluation
means giving a value judgement to an action that is taking place [36]. There is no
approach that is preferable to another and which can be implemented in every case.
Each approach has its own logic, its own internal coherence, and more than one can be
combined. However, we may state that the combined use of the previous approaches
is linked to the evaluation goals. It depends on the on particular conditions in which
the programme is being implemented [35].
From an overview of existing evaluation methodologies that can be applied to
plans and programmes, the article will focus on quality assessment in relation to
architectural projects.
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 231

2.2 Evaluation Applied to Design Processes

Currently, a standardization process to assess the building quality aspects is being

developed due to a continuous evolution of the users’ needs and to the transformation
in territorial policies [16]. This standardization process affects both the design and
its residential quality levels as well as the various construction phases.
The aim of the performance-requirement regulations is to define and control the
buildings’ quality, establishing a relationship between asset performance and users’
needs. They refer to safety, well-being, fruition, aesthetics, management, integra-
bility and environment protection and they are in turn translated into requirements,
quantifiable through appropriate parameters and verification methods.
In Europe various project evaluation methodological systems are being devel-
oped, which consider the main project’s technological, functional, environmental
and management aspects. We may chronologically organise them as following:
– In the mid-70s, tools for the evaluation of functional-spatial quality were created
to promote the living quality by taking into account the main technological,
functional, environmental and management aspects of buildings.
– In the early 90s, attention to the environmental performance of buildings led to
the development of sustainability quality standards. The focus is increasingly on
tools for evaluating the energy-environmental quality.
Here below we outline some of the most popular methodologies to evaluate
quality:
• Functional-spatial quality assessment tools. They are meant for the preliminary
assessment of the new buildings’ quality. They include functional-spatial criteria
that refer to the various levels: apartment, building, group of buildings and urban
location of the residential organism. As example, in France, l’Indicateur Qualitel
[28, 29] has been implemented for homes; in the United Kingdom the Housing
Quality Indicator [17, 38] and in Italy the SIVA/Sisco [12] system has been
patented.
– QUALITEL: was created in France in 1974 as proposed by the Ministry
of Housing and Urban Planning. The aim was to identify and promote the
quality of living through a system to evaluate residential projects, providing
the end user with adequate information on the quality levels of his/her own
property. It was made compulsory for subsidised housing projects with more
than fifty units. As a result, more than 270,000 living units have been certi-
fied since 1984. The method focuses on the main technological, functional,
environmental and managerial aspects of the buildings, by defining 13 evalu-
ation criteria. According to the them, the building is ranked in one of the five
defined performance levels referring to its intrinsic quality and its maintenance
costs. Sustainability issues, which were not kept as urgent when the assess-
ment method was established, were introduced in 2000, extending the field of
232 G. Acampa and G. Marino

study and application to existing buildings, with the establishment of specific

working groups that produced four types of options:
• Cerqual, certification of new collective or semi-independent housing;
• Cequami, certification of individual living units;
• Cerqual Patrimonie, certification of existing buildings;
• Cequabat, a support body for different needs and evaluation procedures.
– HQI, l’Housing Quality Indicator: was created in 1998 in the United
Kingdom to evaluate housing projects, promoted and set up by Housing Corpo-
ration, a governmental agency which finances the construction of new low-cost
housing complexes. Its use is necessary to be admitted to the National Afford-
able Housing Programme managed by the Homes and Community Agency (the
national agency for housing and urban regeneration). HQL assesses the global
quality through the Design and Quality Standard (D&QS) method. The D&QS
is divided into three main areas defined by specific parameters, and concerns:
• functional-spatial quality of the building and the neighbourhood (Housing
Quality Indicator);
• energy-environmental sustainability (Code for Sustainable Homes);
• architectural and urban quality (Building for life).
This tool defines 10 indicators referring to the housing unit, its environment
and functional aspects. The evaluation activity is carried out by filling a ques-
tionnaire in which each indicator is obtained by answering to list of questions
having different weights. The ten indicators, on the other hand, weigh the same
in the evaluation of the overall quality (Fig. 1).
– SIVA-Sisco, Sistemi Integrati di Valutazione dell’Architettura: the method,
patented in 1999, shows how it is possible to achieve close methodological
integration between the projects’ drawing design process, quality evaluation
procedures and cost control tools [14]. Conceptually and operationally the
method integrates three essential components which strongly interact (Fig. 2):
• Sisco Quality sets the architectural requirements of the objects and the
indicators to check how they are met according to the needs as defined by

Fig. 1 Excel spreadsheet, HQI calculator (721 Housing Quality Indicators (HQI) Form)
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 233

Fig. 2 Sisco conceptual

diagram (Authors’
elaboration)

designers along with users and stakeholders. This technique is supported

by filling matrices that vary according to the evaluated objects and to the
classes of needs, and are useful as an operative guidance methodology.
• Sisco-Costs is divided in two phases: the first consists of a parametric control
on the cost impact of the single building components, whereas the second
focuses on the selection of technological and finishing solutions. The system
evaluates the impact of these choices on construction and maintenance costs,
evaluating the initial performance level of each technical elements in terms
of durability, reliability and maintainability.
• Sisco-Architectonic focuses on the basic spaces of the building, including
the living units and the common areas, patios, stairway/lift blocks and
garages. Thus, it is possible to compose many typological Modules and/or
aggregative Modules, which can be combined to generate Housing Organ-
isms. Both the technical and the typological data sheets have been connected
to each accommodation or housing organisms.
• Energy-environmental quality assessment tools: they were developed to certify
buildings with high energy performance and low environmental impact. They
assess if and how the criteria related to site quality, resource consumption and envi-
ronmental loads and indoor environmental quality are met. These tools can be used
at local or supra-local level for regulating building activity and awarding bonuses,
discounts or incentives of various kinds. To this category belong the BREEAM
(UK), LEED (USA), GBTool (international platform), ITACA Protocol (Italy),
the Level(s) methods [40] adopted in the European Community, as well as the
Well system [27] implemented in the United States and many others. In this paper
we choose to deal only with Levels, showing how policy initiatives can match
with a European framework that has been developed, tried, and tested by a large
number of building professionals across the EU and Well a system that can also
assess the psychophysical well-being of people enjoying the interior spaces of a
building. Level(s), is a tool for designing and constructing sustainable buildings,
234 G. Acampa and G. Marino

developed by the European Commission in collaboration with a large and fairly

heterogeneous set of building stakeholders including European Green Building
Councils. Level(s) is peculiar in that it is a non-commercial voluntary frame-
work to measure, report, and share the environmental performance of buildings.
It includes several indicators to measure the environmental performance of build-
ings throughout all the phases of its life cycle, as it aims to promote life cycle
thinking, Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC). There
are 14 indicators covering six areas of sustainability and six macro-objectives:
Greenhouse gas emissions throughout the building’s life cycle.
1. Resource efficient and circular material life cycles
2. Efficient use of water resources
3. Healthy and comfortable spaces
4. Adaptation and resilience to climate change
5. Life cycle cost and value
An overview of the indicators, scenarios and LCA tools included in the Level(s)
framework is presented in Fig. 3. Currently office and residential buildings are within
the scope of Level(s), as far as new buildings and major renovations are concerned.
The adoption of Level(s) will lead to the easier adoption of a standardized way
to measure, compare, and improve the performance of buildings, both in terms of
environmental impacts and costs. This in turn will guarantee a better future and better
buildings.

Fig. 3 Overview of the Level(s) framework

Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 235

– Well (Well Building Standard) [41]: launched in October 2014 is a vehicle for
buildings and organizations to deliver better spaces that improve human health and
well-being. The approach behind WELL certification, which was created to better
manage and live the time spent indoors, i.e. about 90% of a day, can be applied
to all building sectors and all uses of buildings, such as residential complexes,
schools, hospitals. Yet, its best fits in work environments, where creating quiet
and peace of mind may also have a positive impact on productivity. There are ten
issues that the WELL protocol evaluates and certifies:
1. Air
2. Water
3. Nourishment
4. Light.
5. Movement
6. Thermal comfort
7. Sound
8. Materials
9. Mind
10. Community.
Every WELL project is verified through on-site testing of the building perfor-
mance. Each issue is analysed through scientific measurements, checking the quality
level of an enclosed space and thus defining a plan for possible future improvement
strategies (Fig. 4).
This procedure is particularly useful in high-performing buildings and helps
project teams to better understand the relationship between physical environment
and human health.

Fig. 4 Well concepts, quick overview

236 G. Acampa and G. Marino

2.3 The Validation of a Model According to the BIM

Methodology

However, in recent years, researches have focused on developing and setting tools that
deliver global quality evaluation of existing and new buildings. Quality assessment
of a whole system cannot be inferred from that of single objects neither of that of
each subsystem (structural, architectural, plant engineering) but only looking at the
system as a whole.
For this reason, a strong focus was put on the development of flexible tools for data
processing. BIM systems fit in this scenario only if they are used by an expert in eval-
uation who integrates validation procedures with the data once properly organized
and processed [19, 4].
In order to apply an automated validation process, BIM models should not only
contain purely geometric data but should also to be integrated with all informa-
tion required to verify the project compliance with regulations and in reference to
performance standards.
In this respect, Model checking software allows a quality control on the design
process. Specifically, Solibri Model Checker (SMC) is a software whose main aim is
to support the activity of project verification which allows the automatic control of
compliance with current regulations by highlighting any critical issue, for instance
the intersection of structures and facilities to be installed. So, thanks to the neutral
IFC interchange format, parameters are analysed, validated and subjected to different
validation domains [26].
The following section shows the main phases that are undertaken using Solibri
Model Checker: BIM Validation, which checks the modelling attributes; Clash
Detection, interference verification and Code Checking, control of conformity with
standards [5].
• The first phase of BIM Validation analyses and determines model level of quality
and internal consistency, checking that elements have been correctly named and
classified [3]. The issues detected in this phase can be related both to alphanumeric
content (i.e. parametric model attributes), or merely to the geometric one.
Inconsistencies related to model geometry can be many, including: overlapping
and incorrect sizing of objects, as in the Fig. 5, or the minimum distance not
respected between the different components.
While as regards the objects’ informative attributes thanks to the Classification
function within Solibri, it is possible to use pre-defined classifications, such as
Omniclass, Masterclass and Uniclass, or customized work-breakdown structures
[15] and validate their corresponding Level of Development (LOD).
At the end of the check, elements with missing (undefined) requirements will be
highlighted as issues.
• The Clash Detection or interference check—the second phase in Model
Checking—is divided in different steps: first of all, the designer must detect
possible interferences in his/her own BIM Authoring platform. Only after that,
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 237

Fig. 5 On the left two floors are compenetrating; On the right there is an incongruity between the
dimensioning of a window and the ceiling height

he has to verify also incongruities with other design models (such as those for
structural and plant engineering) through validation software Solibri [30]. There
are 3 main types of clashes:
1. Hard Clash: when two objects pass through each other. Most BIM modelling
software eliminate the likelihood for this using clash detection rules based on
embedded object data (like Fig. 6).
2. Soft Clash: work to detect clashes which occur when objects encroach into
geometric tolerances for other objects (for example, a building being modelled
too close to a high-tension wire).
3. 4D/Workflow Clash: clash resolves scheduling clashes and abnormalities as
well as delivery clashes (for example, work crews arriving when there is no
equipment on site.)

Fig. 6 Clash Detection

238 G. Acampa and G. Marino

Fig. 7 Dimensional controls

of compliance with
accessibility regulations

Clash detection helps in effective identification, inspection and reporting of inter-

ferences in a project model. It is used for checking completed/ongoing work and
reduces the risk of human error during model inspections.
• In the last phase, Code Checking, the project is validated or not by comparing its
parameters with the reference standards and regulations [9]. Building processes
are regulated by a large number of local, national and international laws and
regulations and the information contained there can be translated into parametric
rules. Below is a list showing some of the main compliance checks available in
Solibri:
– Verifications of minimum areas rooms in relation to their function;
– Verifications of the minimum stairs and accesses dimensions;
– Verifications of compliance with building and hygiene regulations (minimum
heights, volumes, equipment of services, air-lighting ratios, etc.);
– Verifications of accessibility to the buildings (corridors, toilets, etc.) and the
presence of architectural barriers;
– Fire prevention checks (fire resistance of elements and compartments, escape
routes, etc.);
– Safety checks;
– Hospital regulations checks (Fig. 7).

Thanks to the creation of sets of rules, the validation process is increasingly

objective.

3 Future Developments to Ensure Design Quality

The increasing need of assessing the quality of projects, can be met by setting up
procedures to analyse the complexity of the aspects considered [10].
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 239

It is clear how the BIM methodology develops a new way of conceiving the eval-
uation of architectural quality: the simulation of the design model makes it possible
to carry out checks and controls in an automatic or semi-automatic way.
The next step is the development of user-customizable plug-ins within BIM soft-
ware. Thanks to them, it will be possible to validate the correspondence of the model
to predetermined quality requirements according to specific criteria [24]. Most of
contemporary BIM applications support functional extensibility by providing what
is known as application programming interface (API). By using these expert users
with knowledge in computer programing languages such as C#, C++, or Visual
BASIC can create customized functions.
Users may need programming knowledge or collaboration with programmers to
update existing code structures, but they will then be able of including new tools and
algorithms during the simulation processes.
In recent years, several applications were developed to include assessment in
BIM environments. A commonly used BIM software is Revit, whose capabilities can
also be extended by several plug-ins related to architectural, structural, mechanical,
plumbing, electrical, energy simulation, rendering and others.
For example, it is now possible to manage the inherent complexity of a building
while implementing seismic risk assessment procedures just by using appropriate
plug-ins. Welch et al. [37], have shown how to administer a self-diagnosis process
relying on information regarding damages occurred, received from structural health
monitoring technologies before and after an earthquake. The need for potentially
dangerous and time-consuming post-earthquake physical inspections is thus clearly
reduced.
Plug-ins have also been developed to evaluate the design of a project’s spaces
focusing on internal circulation and user satisfaction [22, 31]. In particular, Jalaei
and Jrade have proposed a customised Revit plug-in to facilitate the assessment of
LEED indicators in a BIM environment [18].
The authors undertook to create and test a Revit plug-in for evaluating the trans-
formability of dwellings, allowing a comparison of the resulting scenarios. The
may help architects together with other stakeholders to develop holistic renova-
tion scenarios and make informed decisions in a shorter period of time [2]. Thus,
the introduction of customisable plug-ins brings evaluation capabilities directly
into the design environment (avoiding data integration), while also implementing
mechanisms to meet the requirements set by designers and stakeholders [8].

4 Conclusion

This paper stresses the importance of evaluation by firstly analysing the different
evaluation methodologies applied to plans and programmes. Secondly, it shows how
evaluation can be extended to housing projects by referring to the evaluation systems
developed in different countries and how, with the spread of BIM methodologies,
240 G. Acampa and G. Marino

evaluation has become an integral part of the design process through model validation
and control procedures.
Finally, this paper supports an innovative approach to implement evaluation
methodologies within a BIM environment by means of new customizable plug-
ins. The authors created a Revit plug-in and tested it on real buildings in order to
demonstrate not only the feasibility of the approach, but also the reliability and vali-
dation by the plug-in. This allows to automatically assess dwellings’ transformability,
and speeds up the assessment and comparison of different scenarios and simplifies
the evaluation of apartments where it will be suitable to intervene on due to their
constructive and typological features [2].
Developing a plug-in that integrates an automated evaluation system will help
ensuring that the final product of the design is a functional and quality building [13],
and it will also increase the transparency of the evaluation process.

References

1. Acampa G, Crespo Cabillo I, Marino G (2019) Representación del dibujo frente a simulación
de los sistemas BIM. Oportunidad o amenaza para la arquitectura. ACE Archit City Environ
14:111. https://doi.org/10.5821/ace.14.40.6689
2. Acampa G, Diana L, Marino G, Marmo R (2021) Assessing the transformability of public
housing through BIM. Sustainability 13:5431
3. Acampa G, Garcìa JO, Grasso M, Diaz-Lopez C (2019) Project sustainability: criteria to be
introduced in BIM. Valori e valutazioni
4. Acampa G, Forte F, De Paola P (2020) Values and functions for future cities, green energy and
technology. p. 351–363 ISSN 18653529. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23786-8_20
5. Acampa G, Marino G, Ticali D (2019) Validation of infrastructures through BIM. AIP Conf
Proc 2186:160011. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5138079
6. Azhar S (2011) Building information modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and challenges
for the AEC industry. Leadersh Manag Eng 11:241–252
7. Calonghi L (1992) Strumenti di valutazione. Firenze: Giunti
8. Carvalho JP, Bragança L, Mateus R (2021) Sustainable building design: analysing the feasi-
bility of BIM platforms to support practical building sustainability assessment. Comput Ind
127:103400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2021.103400
9. Ciribini ALC, Mastrolembo Ventura S, Bolpagni M (2016) La validazione del contenuto infor-
mativo è la chiave del successo di un processo BIM-based. Territorio Italia 9–31. https://doi.
org/10.14609/Ti_2_15_1i
10. Eastman C, Lee J, Jeong Y, Lee J (2009) Automatic rule-based checking of building designs.
Autom Constr 18:1011–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.07.002
11. Eastman CM (ed) (2011) BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners,
managers, designers, engineers and contractors, 2nd ed. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
12. Fattinnanzi E (2012) La valutazione della qualità e dei costi nei progetti residenziali. Il brevetto
SISCo. Valori e Valutazioni 9–28
13. Fattinnanzi E, Acampa G, Forte F, Rocca F (2018) The overall quality assessment in an
architecture project. Valori e Valutazioni 3–14
14. Fattinnanzi E, Micelli E. Valutare il progetto di Architettura
15. Fontana F, Turco ML, caso studio del Lefay Resort I, Dolomiti SPA I Linguaggi del BIM: la
digitalizzazione dei processi tra Prassi e Norme
16. Forte F (2019) Architectural quality and evaluation: a reading in the European framework.
Rivista SIEV, Valori e Valutazioni 23:37–45
Past, Present and Future: From Evaluation to Project Validation 241

17. Harrison A (1999) Housing quality indicators. DEGW: United Kingdom

18. Jalaei F, Jrade A (2015) Integrating building information modeling (BIM) and LEED system
at the conceptual design stage of sustainable buildings. Sustain Cities Soc 18:95–107. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.06.007
19. Mondini (2016) Integrated assessment for the mangement of new social challenges | Valu-
tazioni integrate per la gestione delle nuove sfide sociali G. Mondini ISSN: 2036–2404 Valori
e valutazioni: teorie ed esperienze 17:15–17 BIM models and evaluations
20. Moro G. La valutazione possibile. Metodi e casi
21. Moro G (2005) La valutazione delle politiche pubbliche. Carocci
22. Na S, Hong SW, Jung S, Lee J (2020) Performance evaluation of building designs with
BIM-based spatial patterns. Autom Constr 118:103290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.
103290
23. Palumbo M (2001) II processo di valutazione. Decidere, programmare, valutare, FrancoAngeli,
Milano
24. Park JH, Nagakura T (2014) A thousand Bim: a rapid value-simulation approach to developing a
BIM tool for supporting collaboration during schematic design. Int J Archit Comput 12:47–60.
https://doi.org/10.1260/1478-0771.12.1.47
25. Patassini D (2019) Cultura della valutazione. Rassegna di approcci, metodi e tecniche
26. Pavan A, Mirarchi C, Giani M (2017) BIM: metodi e strumenti. Progettare, costruire e gestire
nell’era digitale. Tecniche Nuove
27. Potrč Obrecht T, Kunič R, Jordan S, Dovjak M (2019) Comparison of health and well-being
aspects in building certification schemes. Sustainability 11:2616
28. Qualitel A (2012) Qualitel: habitat and environment. Qualitel et Habitat and Environment de
CERQUAL
29. Qualitel G (1989) Association qualitel. Paris
30. Seggiaro V (2017) Analisi di fattibilità e sviluppo di una procedura automatica per il code
checking di modelli BIM strutturali= Feasibility analysis and development of an automatic
procedure for code checking of structural BIM models. PhD Thesis, Politecnico di Torino
31. Shin J, Lee J-K (2019) Indoor walkability index: BIM-enabled approach to quantifying building
circulation. Autom Constr 106:102845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102845
32. Stame N (2001) Tre approcci principali al tema della valutazione: distinguere e combinare.
Palumbo, M Il processo di valutazione Milano: FrancoAngeli
33. Stame N (2007) Classici della valutazione. Franco Angeli, Milano
34. Stame N (2003) Evaluation and the policy context: the European experience. Eval J Australasia
3:36–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X0300300210
35. Stame N (2018) Strengthening the ethical expertise of evaluators. Evaluation 24:438–451.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389018804942
36. Weiss CH (1997) Theory-based evaluation: past, present, and future. N Dir Eval 1997:41–55.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1086
37. Welch DP, Sullivan TJ, Filiatrault A (2014) Potential of building information modelling for
seismic risk mitigation in buildings. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 47:253–263. https://doi.org/10.
5459/bnzsee.47.4.253-263
38. Wheeler P (2004) Housing quality indicators in practice. In: Designing better buildings: quality
and value in the built environment, 206
39. Zanchetta C, Croatto G, Paparella R, Turrini U (2014) Il performance based building design
per la qualità edilizia: dalla normalizzazione alla LEAN construction. TECHNE: J Technol
Archit Environ 8
40. Level(s) Sustainable buildings - Green growth and circular economy - Environment - European
Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/buildings.htm
41. International WELL Building Institute. https://www.wellcertified.com/
The Regional Price Lists
for the Estimation of Construction Costs:
A Comparison at National Level

Leopoldo Sdino, Fabiana Forte, and Paolo Rosasco

Abstract Given the different stages of the development of a building project, the
economic planning phase of the intervention is quite strategic for its feasibility
(Battisti et al., Land 9(1), (2020); Bottero et al., A literature review on construc-
tion costs estimation: Hot topics and emerging trends. Green Energy and Tech-
nology, pp 117–131, 2021; Napoli et al., Sustainability 11(4), 2019; Rebaudengo
and Prizzon, Lecture notes in computer science (including subseries lecture notes in
artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics. Springer Verlag, pp 473–
484, 2017; Rebaudengo and Piantanida, IOP conference series: materials science and
engineering, 2018; Rebaudengo et al., Smart innovation, system and technologies.
Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland, pp 635–642, 2019; Sdino and
Rosasco, Appraisal and Valuation: Contemporary Issues and New Frontiers. Springer
Verlag, 2020). In the public works field, the correct planning and estimation of costs
allows an effective and efficient allocation of public economic resources and respect
for deadlines, which have a great importance for works destined to essential public
services. The last Italian legislation about the planning and construction of public
works (Legislative Decree n. 50/2016) has introduced some changes relating the
economic planning and cost estimation, the Article n. 23—paragraph 7 establishes
that the definitive project of a public work must contain “definitive quantification of
the expenditure limit for the realization and the relative time schedule, through the
use, where existing, of the price lists prepared by the territorially competent regions
and autonomous provinces, in agreement with the Italian territorial divisions of the

L. Sdino (B)
Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering—ABC Department, Polytechnic
of Milan, Milan, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Forte
Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli,
Aversa, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Rosasco
Department Architecture and Design (dAD), Polytechnic School, University of Genoa, Genoa,
Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 243
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_17
244 L. Sdino et al.

Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport”. The reference to the regional price lists for
the evaluation of the economic amount of a public work (project) aims to establish a
single tool for the different operators (public administrators, designers, construction
companies, etc.) who have to plan and estimate the costs of the project since the
early phases of the design. Unlike the recent past, where the cost estimate of a public
(and private) work could be made using municipal or provincial price lists, nowa-
days the price lists by Italian regions must be taken as a reference. The aim of the
legislator is to take as a reference, in the economic planning phase, a single tool for
estimating costs, sufficiently representative of the various cost formation functions in
the building sector and to consider the specificities of local economic and productive
realities. At this time, all Italian regions have a regional Price List which replace
those developed on a local basis; their use to estimate the cost to be assumed as a
basis for the tender has eliminated the problem of estimating, for the same project,
different costs depending on the local Price List utilized. For a public work, any
differences of the construction cost estimated in the design phase can be justified
only by the different location of the work at a regional level and no longer provincial
or municipal level. Taking as reference a case study relating to the construction of a
medium-sized hospital (300 beds), this study aims to develop a comparison of unit
costs derived from the analysis of the price lists of twenty Italian regions. The aim is
to verify whether, for the same project, the construction costs of the main workings
vary in relation to the regional location and what is the average difference. This is
important not only for an efficient economic planning of public works by local and
national public administrations (preparation of the necessary budget, etc.) but also for
a more effective control of the differences between the initial and final budgets. The
regional Price List for estimating costs represent new tool for an efficient valuation
and governance of the public projects developed by public administrations, a topic
debated within the “Evaluation Sciences” conference organized by Siev, in Syracuse
(Italy), in July 2019.

Keywords Cost estimate · Construction cost · Regional price list

1 Introduction

The economic sustainability of a project depends on a correct planning of the costs

already in the early design phases where the feasibility studies are developed [4,
10], in the field of public works, the economic planning of the project must comply
within the indications given in article 4 of the Legislative Decree n. 50/2016 which
includes provisions relating to the correct estimation of the costs, the management
of the contract and the execution of the works.1 The article n. 23—paragraph 7—
establishes which are the planning phases to be developed for a public work and their
contents; the final project—mandatory for the issue of authorizations and approvals

1 Società Italiana di Estimo e Valutazione (Italian Company of Appraisal and Evaluation).

The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs … 245

by the competent Public Administrations—must include an analytical estimation of

the costs developed using the price lists prepared by the regions and autonomous
provinces.
In the following executive project, necessary for the procurement of the works
and the subsequent construction, each element must be identified by shape, type,
quality, size and price (paragraph 8). According to national legislation, the cost of
each workings must therefore be estimated using the regional Price; when it is not
possible, the cost must be estimated through specific “price analyzes”, as established
by Article 32, paragraph 2, of Presidential Decree n. 207/2010 (Regulation of the
previous Legislative Decree n. 163/2006).
The regional price lists are valid until December 31st of each year and are
updated by the competent territorial structures of the Italian Ministry of Infrastruc-
ture and Transport after consulting the regions concerned (Article 23—paragraph
16—Legislative Decree n. 50/2016) by January 30th of the following year. The unit
prices are thus updated annually on the basis of an analytical analysis of the costs of
the single resources used; this allows both a correct fulfillment of the contract by the
construction company (who at the moment of the economic offer is compared with
the average market prices of the workings to be carried out) and the pursuit of the
public interest.
This adjustment of the price lists must take place through public and transparent
procedures that demonstrate that the contracting authority has used the real average
market prices to estimate the unit costs of the workings in the construction sector.
This procedure allows the widest possible participation of companies in the tender
procedure and allows an efficient and effective use of the public economic resources.
The introduction of regional price lists also limits the phenomenon of the excessive
reduction of the prices offered by the bidders, who thus try to increase the probability
of awarding the works; this leads to a lower quality of the works carried out and to
the frequent request for greater economic rewards during the execution of the works.
The legislator also considers the possibility of using unit prices lower than those
reported in the regional Price List in the elaboration of the economic bill of quantities,
provided that they are adequately justified by specific “price analyzes”.
Although the regional Price List should be the main tool for estimating the costs
of public projects, its use is not mandatory: a recent sentence by the Italian Council
of State has established that its use cannot be an obligation for contracting public
administrations, without a provision that derogates from the powers to update the
tariffs of the contracting authorities. It is also reiterated that it represents a valid
basis that guarantees the uniformity and order of the unit processing prices within
homogeneous territorial areas (the regions). With reference to the regional areas
taken as reference by Legislative Decree no. 50/2016 for the elaboration of regional
price lists, it is therefore possible that the location of a public work in the national
territory affects the estimated cost of the project.
That is, in compliance with the different economic realities that characterize each
Italian region, the unit costs of the same workings envisaged for the realization of
the works may vary from one regional Price List to another.
246 L. Sdino et al.

This paper aims to verify how the unit costs of some of the most common workings
in a building works vary from one Italian region to another; for this purpose, the final
project for the construction of a medium-sized hospital (about 300 beds) is taken as
a case study.

2 The Construction Sector in Italy

In Italy, the construction sector is one of the main national production areas; as
of 2019, there are approximately 481 thousand companies that operate specialized
works, 38 thousand of which operate in the buildings’ construction.
Even the number of workers, although far from those employed before the great
crisis that hit the sector in the years 2008–2009, is important: about 1,4 million; the
national business is about 132 billion euros [1].
The ordinary and extraordinary maintenance of the existing buildings represents
the most consistent activity on the sector with over 70% of the total activity: this
type of activity, supported by tax incentives, in the period 2013–2019 recorded over
28 billion euros of works per year [5].
With regard to public works, in 2018 the total amount of the works amounted to
approximately 139.5 billion euros, a slight increase compared to the previous year
(approximately 137.6 billion euros).
Following the promulgation of the Legislative Decree n. 50/2016, each Region
of Italy has a regional Price List to be used to estimate the costs of public works.
Almost all of them are available online on regional websites or downloadable after
registration.
From a verification conducted by the authors, they are updated annually within
the deadline indicated by the Legislative Decree n. 50/2016 (January 31st of each
year).

3 Methodology

For the comparison of the unit prices of the workings included in the Italian regional
price lists, the project of a new hospital located in Lombardy was used as case study.
For the purposes of correctly identifying the workings to be analyzed, in addition
to the project, the special tender regulations (with the descriptions of each process)
and the economic metric calculation drawn up using the Price List of the Lombardy
Region (year 2019) are been analyzed.
The analysis and comparison of the unit prices of the workings were developed
with reference to those that have a greater incidence on the overall cost. This incidence
was calculated by dividing the cost of the single workings—as shown by the economic
bill of quantities—by the total cost of the project.
Based on this analysis, 19 workings were selected (Table 1).
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs … 247

Table 1 The selected workings and their percentage incidence on the total cost of building hospital
Working Percentage incidence (%)
1. Reinforced concrete vertical and horizontal structures (pillars, 6.2
beams, walls of stairwells and lifts, etc.)
2. Reinforced concrete foundations (plinths, inverted beams, slabs) 3.1
3. Formworks for concrete castings 3.7
4. Interior plasters 5. 0
5. Floor screed 3.1
6. Excavations and demolitions for the construction of foundation 3.1
structures
7. Doors and windows 5..0
8. Electrically operated lift for the disabled in non-residential 2.5
buildings
9. Wall-mounted gas boiler with forced draft, sealed chamber 3.1
10. Reinforced concrete and bricks slabs 7.4
11. Supply and installation of double-leaf fire doors, REI 60 1.9
12. Roof covering with tiles 5.0
13. Small diameter piles (micro piles) for foundations, 1.9
sub-foundations and anchors
14. Solid color linoleum floor 2.5
15. Supply and installation of portable non-corrosive powder 0.6
extinguishers
16. Formation of crawl space formed by a support foundation of the 2.5
8 cm thick plastic elements with concrete
17. Supply and installation of marble or stone slab flooring natural, 3.7
minimum thickness 2 cm
18. Parapet of stairs, galleries, balconies, terraces 1.2
19. Panic exit devices for emergency exits 0.6
TOTAL 62.0

The workings are not ordered according to their weight but according to the order
in which they are reported within the bill of quantities.
The sum of the incidences of all 19 workings is equal to 62.0%; they correspond
to approximately 15.0% of the total number of workings listed in the bill of quantities
(approximately 130).
For this analysis, works outside the hospital such as green areas, public and
private parking lots, roads and pedestrian accesses were not considered. In addi-
tion, processing relating to specific equipment for hospital activities and systems
(electrical, heating, etc.) were not considered due to the difficulty of comparison
with those reported in the single regional price lists.
Each percentage of incidence therefore depends both on the unit cost of workings
reported in the Price List of the Lombardy Region (year 2018) and on the total
quantity necessary for the construction of the hospital.
248 L. Sdino et al.

Table 2 Regional price lists

Id Region Id Region
selected and identification
letters (Id.) LO Lombardy LA Lazio
PI Piedmont MO Molise
VE Veneto AB Abruzzi
LI Liguria SA Sardinia
ER Emilia Romagna AV Aosta Valley
SI Sicily FVG Friuli Venetia Giulia
PU Apulia TU Tuscany
CA Campania BA Basilicata
UM Umbria CA Calabria
MA Marche TAA Trentino Alto Adige

The incidences calculated from the estimated metric calculation were then verified
by analyzing the incidences of the same processes in other projects relating to the
construction of similar hospital buildings included in the BEST 2.0 database of the
Polytechnic of Milan; a substantial analogy of values emerged from the analysis.
As shown in Table 1, in relation to the overall quantities forecasted in the hospital
project, the works that have a greater incidence are respectively the n. 10. Slabs in
reinforced concrete and bricks (7.4%) and n. 1. Vertical and horizontal structures in
reinforced concrete (6.2%).
Those that have the lowest incidence (about 0.6%) are the n. 15. Supply and
installation of portable non-corrosive powder extinguishers” and the n. 19. Panic
exit devices for emergency exits.
For the comparison of unit prices, the price lists published (in the year 2019) by
the 20 Italian regions were considered.
They are identified as follows (Table 2):

4 Unit Prices Analysis

Each working was therefore searched within the 20 regional price lists by comparing
the descriptions reported.
The description of each workings reported in the special tender specifications and
within the bill of quantities has facilitated the identification within each regional
Price List. None required an integration of the unit price regarding the costs of the
resources used (materials, etc.).
In the Table 3 are reported, for each workings, the unit prices as they result within
each regional Price List.
Table 3 Unit prices of each working derived from the 20 regional price lists
Working and unit of Unit prices (e/unit of measure)
measure LO PI VE LI ER SI PU CA UM MA
1. Reinforced concrete 138.44 114.09 127.42 158.13 139.34 167.91 161.89 130.22 124.00 139.48
vertical and horizontal
structures (m3 )
2. Reinforced concrete 125.05 110.62 167.12 158.13 139.34 154.66 134.40 135.77 124.00 139.48
foundations (m3 )
3. Formworks for concrete 37.28 39.87 41.38 41.03 30.44 31.38 33.38 30.88 30.10 38.81
castings (m2 )
4. Interior plasters (m2 ) 19.18 19.42 22.55 18.85 23.57 21.55 19.40 24.91 25.70 26.53
5. Floor screed (m2 ) 14.18 16.31 16.31 20.05 16.96 15.00 17.77 17.46 18.80 15.19
6. Excavations and 15.41 15.14 15.01 14.65 17.02 14.87 21.90 17.41 17.00 18.45
demolitions for the
construction of
foundation structures
(m3 )
7. Doors and windows (m2 ) 352.91 302.05 284.00 281.00 344.32 369.18 374.85 332.70 278.00 357.51
8. Electrically operated lift 24,592.81 24,592.81 25,592.81 31,625.00 24,528.89 28,528.89 25,938.17 24,153.33 22,069.00 29,773.81
for the disabled in
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs …

non-residential buildings
(n°)
9. Wall-mounted gas boiler 1,633.07 1,383.12 1,687.65 1,787.65 1,350.71 1,251.63 1,839.76 1,412.21 1,766.00 1,899.91
with forced draft, sealed
chamber (n°)
10. Reinforced concrete 55.53 65.83 67.40 60.54 47.25 70.27 68.90 59.10 53.00 70.22
and bricks slabs (m2 )
(continued)
249
Table 3 (continued)
250

Working and unit of Unit prices (e/unit of measure)

measure LO PI VE LI ER SI PU CA UM MA
11. Supply and installation 604.46 574.04 605.00 721.05 752.10 540.80 646.52 674.89 738.00 847.65
of double-leaf fire
doors, REI 60 (n°)
12. Roof covering with tiles 24.89 26.5 29.40 34.77 27.99 37.12 28.90 27.88 27.20 35.61
(m2 )
13. Small diameter piles 57.66 55.59 50.77 61.86 57.50 64.17 65.00 54.32 60.00 56.67
(micro piles) for
foundations,
sub-foundations and
anchors (m)
14. Solid color linoleum 33.46 29.36 28.85 25.39 43.14 41.98 30.70 38.51 26.10 29.62
floor (m2 )
15. Supply and installation 46.57 40.23 66.98 58.82 65.14 57.37 63.50 55.72 68.00 66.13
of portable
non-corrosive powder
extinguishers (n°)
16. Formation of crawl 34.90 42.80 33.55 30.43 27.43 36.82 23.80 42.05 37.40 36.59
space formed by a
support foundation of
the 8 cm thick plastic
elements with concrete
(m2 )
(continued)
L. Sdino et al.
Table 3 (continued)
Working and unit of Unit prices (e/unit of measure)
measure LO PI VE LI ER SI PU CA UM MA
17. Supply and installation 95.01 95.34 76.34 87.99 117.79 96.88 125.00 118.10 120.00 135.06
of marble or stone slab
flooring natural (m2 )
18. Parapet of stairs, 7.55 7.06 4.98 7.16 7.50 4.49 8.10 5.94 8.20 6.50
galleries, balconies,
terraces (Kg)
19. Panic exit devices for 191.84 177.50 180.00 196.08 234.12 144.20 232.92 180.33 245.00 252.76
emergency exits (n°)
Working and unit Unit prices (e/unit of measure)
of measure LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA Average RSD
Italy (%)
1. Reinforced 134.16 140.46 141.76 156.82 145.97 168.61 106.14 105.61 129.70 162.70 138.05 14.45
concrete
vertical and
horizontal
structures
(m3 )
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs …

2. Reinforced 128.16 133.02 129.12 166.82 145.97 185.85 109.14 107.26 123.99 156.80 137.33 15.62
concrete
foundations
(m3 )
(continued)
251
Table 3 (continued)
252

Working and unit Unit prices (e/unit of measure)

of measure LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA Average RSD
Italy (%)
3. Formworks 32.80 38.13 33.47 37.98 35.19 36.08 28.25 26.08 30.49 31.52 33.94 13.26
for concrete
castings (m2 )
4. Interior 26.60 27.39 22.32 28.62 20.14 25.95 23.65 23.67 22.90 28.60 23.58 13.10
plasters (m2 )
5. Floor screed 18.10 16.73 16.92 17.57 13.89 15.18 13.43 19.94 20.24 17.18 16.70 12.46
(m2 )
6. Excavations 15.46 22.15 17.35 21.43 22.53 21.55 20.59 21.72 16.15 22.57 18.52 16.09
and
demolitions
for the
construction
of foundation
structures
(m3 )
7. Doors and 387.76 393.03 351.41 330.00 387.28 411.14 397.89 414.73 358.85 413.30 358.09 12.22
windows (m2 )
(continued)
L. Sdino et al.
Table 3 (continued)
Working and unit Unit prices (e/unit of measure)
of measure LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA Average RSD
Italy (%)
8. Electrically 25,306.39 23,453.80 26,000.00 22,402.80 28,378.10 26,320.95 24,320.95 26,094.20 24,094.20 24,570.00 25,555.14 9.19
operated lift
for the
disabled in
non-
residential
buildings (n°)
9. Wall-mounted 1,838.59 1,934.19 1,874.36 1,774.36 1,303.98 1,418.84 1,558.91 1,333.33 1,289.00 1,389.00 1,585.01 14.73
gas boiler
with forced
draft, sealed
chamber (n°)
10. Reinforced 54.75 46.36 56.83 81.02 76.11 71.98 47.33 50.86 73.93 76.14 61.94 17.90
concrete and
bricks slabs
(m2 )
11. Supply and 769.00 747.48 673.64 601.83 784.25 604.34 607.20 547.01 711.30 525.16 661.09 13.63
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs …

installation
of
double-leaf
fire doors,
REI 60 (n°)
(continued)
253
Table 3 (continued)
254

Working and unit Unit prices (e/unit of measure)

of measure LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA Average RSD
Italy (%)
12. Roof 34.13 26.57 37.42 33.49 23.12 33.58 28.29 21.19 31.28 36.38 30.18 15.61
covering
with tiles
(m2 )
13. Small 51.25 52.66 53.38 52.59 59.43 37.67 38.92 33.86 34.24 39.01 51.21 19.47
diameter
piles (micro
piles) for
foundations,
sub-
foundations
and anchors
(m)
14. Solid color 28.92 37.43 30.60 21.33 22.41 43.88 22.52 41.59 40.44 37.94 32.22 23.40
linoleum
floor (m2 )
(continued)
L. Sdino et al.
Table 3 (continued)
Working and unit Unit prices (e/unit of measure)
of measure LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA Average RSD
Italy (%)
15. Supply and 63.16 62.17 51.52 76.01 37.95 70.94 40.25 53.41 45.02 73.26 57.26 20.68
installation
of portable
non-
corrosive
powder
extin-
guishers
(n°)
16. Formation of 43.88 26.87 44.11 47.31 34.43 44.67 33.68 24.00 38.43 29.35 35.53 19.53
crawl space
formed by a
support
foundation
of the 8 cm
thick plastic
elements
with
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs …

concrete
(m2 )
(continued)
255
Table 3 (continued)
256

Working and unit Unit prices (e/unit of measure)

of measure LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA Average RSD
Italy (%)
17. Supply and 102.77 106.06 113.73 91.60 101.61 133.95 73.05 84.05 103.97 68.13 100.93 19.62
installation
of marble or
stone slab
flooring
natural (m2 )
18. Parapet of 7.80 5.91 9.43 4.36 4.79 4.53 4.59 8.25 4.52 3.97 6.20 26.94
stairs,
galleries,
balconies,
terraces (Kg)
19. Panic exit 201.42 221.70 179.87 197.08 134.12 147.51 139.12 143.10 190.01 167.00 185.47 19.79
devices for
emergency
exits (n°)
L. Sdino et al.
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs … 257

In the event that the description of a working did not allow an exact understanding
of what resources were used (supplies, labor, rentals), the relative price analysis
developed by the regional commissions was analyzed.2
Each working was then identified according to the Price List code and verified
the correspondence of the unit of measurement reported for the quantification of the
unit price.
The average price at national level was therefore calculated (Table 3—Average
Italy).
An initial analysis of unit prices clearly shows that the greatest differences are
found for those workings that present a higher level of specialization, both in terms
of professional figures employed (workers) and quality of materials.
These differences, for example, are evident between the works inherent to the
load-bearing structures of the building (pillars, beams, floors) and the processes
related to finishes and systems.
In order to determine what are the percentage differences in the unit prices of the
workings in relation to the regional location, an analysis was developed as follows:
– for each working, the national average unit price was calculated (i.e. the average
of the 20 unit prices);
– for each working and for each regional location, the percentage difference between
the regional unit price and the national average unit price was therefore calculated
(Table 3—Average Italy);
– the percentage Relative Standard Deviation (RSD) was then calculated for each
working (Table 3—RSD %).3
The analysis of the values assumed by RSD shows that the greatest variability
occurs for those workings that do not involve particular specializations (both in
terms of materials used and employed workers); the unit price therefore varies more
sensibly from region to region; in particular (Table 3):
– 18. Parapet of stairs, galleries, balconies, terraces: 26.94%;
– 14. Solid color linoleum floor: 23.40%;
– 15. Supply and installation of portable non-corrosive powder extinguishers:
20.68%.
On the other hand, the lowest variability has been found for some more specialized
processes, which require the use of components and materials whose price is less
affected by the variability connected to the places of supply, particularly (Table 3):
– 8. Electrically operated lift for the disabled in non-residential buildings: 9.19%;
– 7. Doors and windows: 12.22%;
– 5. Floor screed: 12.46%.

2 Many Italian regions provide the Price List with the price analysis of each workings. If these were
not available, they were requested to the regions.
3 It is a dimensionless statistical parameter expressed in percentage terms used to describe the

variability of a data series; it is calculated by dividing the standard deviation by the sample mean
and multiplying the result by 100. It is also called the “coefficient of variation”.
258 L. Sdino et al.

It should be noted that these workings are characterized by a greater standard-

ization of production and by the presence of a lot of producers, both national and
foreign; this determines a greater competitiveness of the product offer and, therefore,
greater uniformity of prices.
A further important analysis on the variability of workings prices is the one relating
to the percentage differences between the unit prices reported at the regional level
and the average value calculated at the national level; compared to the RSD, the value
allows to verify how much the unit price of a working differs—more or less—from
the national average unit price (Table 4).
For some workings, the variability is significant both in terms of positive (unit
price higher than the national average) or negative deviations (unit price lower than
the national average).

5 Results

The results obtained from the analysis show that the percentages of variation in unit
prices are consistent; a single working—18. Parapet of stairs, galleries, balconies,
terraces—has at the same time the lowest and greatest variation compared to the
national average price: −35.98% and +52.07% (Table 5).
In general, the greatest negative percentage changes are recorded with greater
frequency in the regions of central and southern Italy, while the positive ones in the
northern regions.
The region that most frequently shows unit prices lower than the national average
is the Basilicata (BA) while the Friuli Venetia Giulia (FVG) and the Marche (MA)
are the two regions that have a higher frequency of unit prices above the average
(Table 5); however, it should be noted that Basilicata (BA) has, for a working (7.
Doors and windows, the greatest positive difference (+15.82%) while the greatest
negative difference is found for a working in Trentino Alto Adige (18. Stair railing,
galleries, balconies, terraces) (TAA) (−35.98%).
By applying the average percentage deviation calculated for each workings within
the region and its percentage of incidence, it can be calculated the deviation of the
construction cost of the building (hospital) compared to the national average cost4
(Table 6).
The results show that the same project (hospital) has a cost of construction +
7.46% higher than the national average if built in Friuli Venetia Giulia (FVG) and −
7.79% lower if built in Tuscany (TU).
The results obtained, if compared with the previous ones relating to the differences
between the unitary unit costs, show that the overall variation in the construction cost
is determined by those processes which, in addition of having a high difference in unit

4 It should be remembered that this cost takes into account the contribution of only 19 work-
ings selected for the survey and, therefore, it represents a partial value of the total change in the
construction cost.
Table 4 Percentage difference between the national average unit price and the regional unit price
Working and unit of measure Percentage differences (%)
LO PI VE LI ER SI PU CA UM MA
1. Reinforced concrete vertical and horizontal structures (m3 ) 0.28 −17.35 −7.70 14.55 0.94 21.63 17.27 −5.67 −10.18 1.04
2. Reinforced concrete foundations (m3 ) −8.94 −19.45 21.70 15.15 1.47 12.62 −2.13 −1.13 −9.70 1.57
3. Formworks for concrete castings (m2 ) 9.83 17.46 21.91 20.88 −10.32 −7.55 −1.66 −9.02 −11.32 14.34
4. Interior plasters (m2 ) −18.65 −17.64 −4.36 −20.05 −0.04 −8.60 −17.72 5.65 9.00 12.52
5. Floor screed (m2 ) −15.08 −2.32 −2.32 20.08 1.57 −10.16 6.43 4.57 12.59 −9.03
6. Excavations and demolitions for the construction of −16.80 −18.26 −18.96 −20.90 −8.11 −19.71 18.24 −6.00 −8.21 −0.39
foundation structures (m3 )
7. Doors and windows (m2 ) −1.45 −15.65 −20.69 −21.53 −3.84 3.10 4.68 −7.09 −22.36 −0.16
8. Electrically operated lift for the disabled in non-residential −3.77 −3.77 0.15 23.75 −4.02 11.64 1.50 −5.49 −13.64 16.51
buildings (n°)
9. Wall-mounted gas boiler with forced draft, sealed chamber 3.03 −12.74 6.48 12.78 −14.78 −21.03 16.07 −10.90 11.42 19.87
(n°)
10. Reinforced concrete and bricks slabs (m2 ) −10.34 6.29 8.82 −2.26 −23.71 13.45 11.24 −4.58 −14.43 13.37
11. Supply and installation of double-leaf fire doors, REI 60 −8.57 −13.17 −8.48 9.07 13.77 −18.20 −2.20 2.09 11.63 28.22
(n°)
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs …

12. Roof covering with tiles (m2 ) −17.52 −13.02 −2.58 15.21 −7.25 23.00 −4.24 −7.62 −9.87 18.00
13. Small diameter piles (micro piles) for foundations, 12.59 8.55 −0.86 20.79 12.28 25.30 26.92 6.07 17.16 10.66
sub-foundations and anchors (m)
14. Solid color linoleum floor (m2 ) 3.84 −8.89 −10.47 −21.21 33.88 30.28 −4.73 19.51 −19.00 −8.08
15. Supply and installation of portable non-corrosive powder −18.67 −29.74 16.98 2.73 13.77 0.20 10.90 −2.68 18.76 15.50
extinguishers (n°)
16. Formation of crawl space formed by a support foundation −1.78 20.45 −5.58 −14.36 −22.80 3.62 −33.02 18.34 5.26 2.98
of the 8 cm thick plastic elements with concrete (m2 )
(continued)
259
Table 4 (continued)
260

Working and unit of measure Percentage differences (%)

LO PI VE LI ER SI PU CA UM MA
17. Supply and installation of marble or stone slab flooring −5.86 −5.54 −24.36 −12. 16.71 −4.01 23.85 17.01 18.90 33.82
natural (m2 ) 82
18. Parapet of stairs, galleries, balconies, terraces (Kg) 21.7 13.85 −19.69 15.47 20.95 −27.59 30.63 −4.21 32.24 4.82
19. Panic exit devices for emergency exits (n°) 3.44 −4.30 −2.95 5.72 26.23 −22.25 25.59 −2.77 32.10 36.28
Working and unit of measure Percentage differences (%)
LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA
1. Reinforced concrete vertical and horizontal structures (m3 ) −2.82 1.75 2.69 13.60 5.74 22.14 −23.11 −23.50 −6.5 17.86
2. Reinforced concrete foundations (m3 ) −6.67 −3.14 −5.98 21.48 6.29 35.34 −20.52 −21.89 −9.71 14.18
3. Formworks for concrete castings (m2 ) −3.37 12.34 −1.39 11.90 3.68 6.30 −16.77 −23.16 −10.17 −7.14
4. Interior plasters (m2 ) 12.81 16.16 −5.34 21.38 −14.58 10.06 0.30 0.39 −2.88 21.30
5. Floor screed (m2 ) 8.40 0.20 1.33 5.23 −16.81 −9.09 −19.57 19.42 21.22 2.89
6. Excavations and demolitions for the construction of −16.53 19.59 −6.32 15.70 21.64 16.35 11.17 17.27 −12.80 21.86
foundation structures (m3 )
7. Doors and windows (m2 ) 8.29 9.76 −1.86 −7.84 8.15 14.82 11.12 15.82 0.21 15.42
8. Electrically operated lift for the disabled in non-residential −0.97 −8.22 1.74 −12.34 11.05 3.00 −4.83 2.11 −5.72 −3.85
buildings (n°)
9. Wall-mounted gas boiler with forced draft, sealed chamber 16.00 22.03 18.26 11.95 −17.73 −10.48 −1.65 −15.88 −18.68 −12.37
(n°)
10. Reinforced concrete and bricks slabs (m2 ) −11.60 −25.15 −8.25 30.81 22.88 16.21 −23.58 −17.88 19.36 22.93
11. Supply and installation of double-leaf fire doors, REI 60 16.32 13.07 1.90 −8.96 18.63 −8.58 −8.15 −17.26 7.59 −20.56
(n°)
(continued)
L. Sdino et al.
Table 4 (continued)
Working and unit of measure Percentage differences (%)
LA MO AB SA AV FVG TU BA CA TAA
12. Roof covering with tiles (m2 ) 13.09 −11.96 24.00 10.97 −23.39 11.27 −6.26 −29.78 3.65 20.55
13. Small diameter piles (micro piles) for foundations, 0.07 2.83 4.23 2.69 16.05 −26.44 −24.00 −33.88 −33.14 −23.83
sub-foundations and anchors (m)
14. Solid color linoleum floor (m2 ) −10.25 16.16 −5.04 −33.81 −30.45 36.17 −30.11 29.07 25.50 17.74
15. Supply and installation of portable non-corrosive powder 10.31 8.58 −10.02 32.75 −33.72 23.90 −29.70 −6.72 −21.37 27.95
extinguishers (n°)
16. Formation of crawl space formed by a support foundation 23.49 −24.38 24.14 33.15 −3.10 25.72 −5.21 −32.46 8.15 −17.40
of the 8 cm thick plastic elements with concrete (m2 )
17. Supply and installation of marble or stone slab flooring 1.83 5.09 12.68 −9.24 0.68 32.72 −27.62 −16.72 3.01 −32.50
natural (m2 )
18. Parapet of stairs, galleries, balconies, terraces (Kg) 25.79 −4.69 52.07 −29.69 −22.75 −26.95 −25.98 33.04 −27.11 −35.98
19. Panic exit devices for emergency exits (n°) 8.60 19.54 −3.02 6.26 −27.69 −20.47 −24.99 −22.84 2.45 −9.96
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs …
261
262 L. Sdino et al.

Table 5 Maximum negative and positive percentage deviations in the regional unit prices of
workings with respect to the national average unit price
Working Max negative deviation Max positive deviation
(%)—region (%)—region
1. Reinforced concrete vertical and −23.50 BA 22.14 FVG
horizontal structures (m3 )
2. Reinforced concrete foundations −21.89 BA 35.34 FVG
(m3 )
3. Formworks for concrete castings −23.16 BA 21.91 VE
(m2 )
4. Interior plasters (m2 ) −20.05 LI 21.38 SA
5. Floor screed (m2 ) −19.57 TO 21.22 CA
6. Excavations and demolitions for −20.90 LI 21.86 TAA
the construction of foundation
structures (m3 )
7. Doors and windows (m2 ) −22.36 U 15.82 BA
8. Electrically operated lift for the −13.64 U 23.75 LI
disabled in non-residential
buildings (n°)
9. Wall-mounted gas boiler with −21.03 SI 22.03 MO
forced draft, sealed chamber (n°)
10. Reinforced concrete and bricks −25.15 MO 30.81 SA
slabs (m2 )
11. Supply and installation of −20.56 TAA 28.22 MA
double-leaf fire doors, REI 60
(n°)
12. Roof covering with tiles (m2 ) −29.78 BA 24.00 A
13. Small diameter piles (micro −33.88 BA 26.92 PU
piles) for foundations,
sub-foundations and anchors
(m)
14. Solid color linoleum floor (m2 ) −33.81 SA 36.17 FVG
15. Supply and installation of −33.72 SA 32.75 VA
portable non-corrosive powder
extinguishers (n°)
16. Formation of crawl space −33.02 A 33.15 SA
formed by a support foundation
of the 8 cm thick plastic
elements with concrete (m2 )
17. Supply and installation of −32.50 TAA 33.82 MA
marble or stone slab flooring
natural (m2 )
18. Parapet of stairs, galleries, −35.98 TAA 52.07 A
balconies, terraces (Kg)
19. Panic exit devices for −27.69 AV 36.28 MA
emergency exits (n°)
The Regional Price Lists for the Estimation of Construction Costs … 263

Table 6 Deviation of the total construction cost in each region from the national average cost
Id Deviation of construction cost (%) Id Deviation of construction cost (%)
LO −3.43 LA +1.68
PI −4.03 MO +0.78
VE −1.79 AB +2.23
LI +1.07 SA +5.57
ER −1.47 AV −0.04
SI +2.38 FVG +7.46
PU +3.24 TU −7.79
CA −0.39 BA −5.73
UM −1.81 CA −0.01
MA +6.12 TAA +3.76

price compared to the national average value, also have a greater economic impact
within the project (percentage of incidence).

6 Conclusions

The study has been developed to evaluate the variation in unit prices of construction
works taking as reference the regional price lists introduced by the article 23 of the
Italian Legislative Decree n. 50/2016.
The comparison was made by referring to 19 processes relating to the construction
of a hospital; they were selected in relation to their incidence on the total construction
cost (overall 62.0%).
The analysis was conducted by comparing the unit prices reported in the 20
regional price lists and compared with the national average value.
What emerges is that, although some negative deviations are more frequent in
some regions of the south and positive ones in some of the north Italy, the variation
in prices seems to be more related to the type and to the single characteristics of the
working (standardization, quality of materials used, etc.).
The analysis of the differences in the overall construction cost highlights this
phenomenon; the difference in the value (calculated only on the 19 workings) between
the regions of the north, center and south Italy is not so evident: although the positive
difference (over cost) is recorded in the Friuli Venetia Giulia (FVG– +7.46%), while
the region with the greatest negative variation in construction costs is Tuscany (TU),
located in central Italy (−7.79%).
Even though the analysis must be further investigated including other workings
that were not considered in this study, a significant conclusion is that the unit prices
of workings in the construction sector are strongly influenced by both the territorial
and technological variables.
264 L. Sdino et al.

The adoption of the regional Price List provided for by Legislative Decree n.
50/2016 therefore makes it possible to adequately consider the various cost forma-
tion functions, also guaranteeing a significant territorial basis to be assumed for
forecasting the costs of public works.

References

1. ANCE (Associazione Nazionale Costruttore Edili) (2019) Osservatorio Congiunturale

sull’industria delle Costruzioni – Rapporto 2019, Roma, Gennaio
2. Battisti F, Campo O, Forte F (2020) A methodological approach for the assessment of potentially
buildable land for tax purposes: The Italian case study. Land 9(1):8
3. Bottero M, Caprioli C, Oppio A (2021) A literature review on construction costs estimation:
hot topics and emerging trends. Green Energy and Technology, pp 117–131
4. Capolongo S, Sdino L, Dell’Ovo M, Moioli R, Della Torre S (2019) How to assess urban
regeneration proposals by considering conflicting values. Sustainability 11(14):3877
5. CRESME (2019) Il mercato delle costruzioni 2020 - XXVII Rapporto Congiunturale e
Previsionale. Cresme, Bologna
6. Napoli G, Giuffrida S, Trovato MG (2019) Efficiency versus fairness in the management of
public housing assets in Palermo (Italy). Sustainability 11(4)
7. Rebaudengo M, Prizzon F (2017) Assessing the investments sustainability after the new code on
public contracts. In: Murgante B, Apduhan BO, Borruso G, Cuzzocrea A, Torre CM, Gervasi
O, Tania D, Stankova E, Rocha AMAC, Misra S (eds) Lecture notes in computer science
(including subseries lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes in bioinformatics,
vol 10409 LNCS. Springer: Verlag, pp 473–484
8. Rebaudengo M, Piantanida P (2018) Maintenance of buildings: Italian examples of devia-
tions between planned and incurred costs. In: IOP conference series: materials science and
engineering, vol 351, Issue 1, Article n. 0120132017
9. Rebaudengo M, Innocente G, Crisafulli A (2019) PPs palatability to complete unfinished public
works in Italy. In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della Spina L (eds) Smart innovation, system and
technologies, vol 100. Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland, pp 635–642
10. Sdino L, Magoni S (2018) The sharing economy and real estate market: the phenomenon of
shared houses. Integrated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities – green energy
and technology. Springer, Verlag, pp 241–251
11. Sdino L, Rosasco P (2020) The regional price list for estimating the costs of construction. In:
Morano P, Oppio A, Rosato P, Sdino L, Tajani F (eds) Appraisal and valuation: contemporary
issues and new frontiers. Springer: Verlag
Oligopsony Hypothesis in the Real Estate
Market. Supply Fragmentation
and Demand Reduction in the Economic
Crisis
Pierluigi Morano, Francesca Salvo, Manuela De Ruggiero, Francesco Tajani,
and Daniela Tavano

Abstract This paper intends to examine the property market structure, taking into
account the effects determined by the 2007 financial crisis, that has hit the real
estate sector producing both the multiplication and fragmentation of the supply and
a progressive reduction in the demand. Starting from an examination of the market
structures that typically describe the behaviors of the real estate market operators,
the research prefigures the hypothesis of oligopsony, normally referable to movable
asset classes. As evidence of the hypothesis, a case study referring to the city of
Cosenza (Southern Italy) has been analyzed. The study carried out highlights market
anomalies that can occur in specific conditions, by determining the difficulty to
identify reliable comparables for the assessment of property market values.

Keywords Market structure · Oligopsony · Appraisal · Asking prices · Market

value

P. Morano
Department of Civil Engineering Sciences and Architecture, Polytechnic University of Bari, Bari,
Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Salvo (B) · M. De Ruggiero · D. Tavano
Department of Environmental Engineering, University of Calabria, Arcavacata, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
D. Tavano
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Tajani
Department of Architecture and Design, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 265
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_18
266 P. Morano et al.

1 Introduction

Appraisal is a relatively recent scientific discipline. In a rather short period of time, it

has been able to equip itself with a very solid but at the same time flexible epistemo-
logical proprium, capable of adapting and responding to the requests of a constantly
changing society, showing its complex and interdisciplinary nature. The empirical
phenomena and the widespread reference literature have pointed out that appraisal
is able to respond both to practical questions and to emergencies more closely linked
to the environmental and historical issues [5, 15, 17].
This has been possible thanks to the liveliness of research and academic debate
which, starting from solid and indisputable appraisal prodromes, has led to the defi-
nition of several assessment procedures that have become increasingly complex and
sophisticated, in a perspective such as that of standardization aimed at conferring
objectivity to the evaluations [7, 20].
In compliance with the uniqueness of the underlying methodology, which is based
on the comparison between the subject and other properties (precisely “compara-
bles”), the numerous procedures that logically derive from it base their validity on
postulates and hypotheses referring to the price formation mechanisms of the real
estate sector and, more generally, to macro and micro-economic market theories [24].
It is known that, with reference to the second-hand market, the monopolistic
competition is usually considered the most suitable market form, taking into account
the conditions of pulverization of the supply and the demand, the strict substitutability
of the properties, the high elasticity and the cross-elasticity of the demand [13].
These assumptions are reflected in the price formation mechanism, whereby the
degree of discretion in supply remains contained within certain limits, producing
a sort of leveling of the selling prices. This circumstance is evident from the fact
that, by examining the different market segments, it is possible to trace market trends
evidenced by the level of substantially homogeneous average prices for similar goods
located in the same area.
Under these conditions, the formation mechanism of sold property prices can be
interpreted, so that, in compliance with the appraisal principles, it is also possible to
predict the most likely market values.
However, it should be noted that, in recent years, and especially in static real estate
markets, these assumptions are not satisfied by the empirical evidence, by revealing
the need of use of rationality measures and weight coefficients to bridge the gap
between hypothesis and reality [23].
Based on these considerations, this contribution intends to examine the conditions
that characterize the real estate markets that have particularly suffered the effects of
the financial crisis, verifying the impossibility of applying the conditions of the usual
market structures, and prefiguring the existence of alternative ones. Starting from the
analysis of the market structures typically used in the real estate sector (Sect. 2), the
contribution assumes the possibility of referring to oligopsonic markets (Sect. 3),
verifying in a real case study (Sect. 4), the goodness of the hypothesis assumed. The
results suggest the opportunity to adjust the appraisal procedures in the light of the
Oligopsony Hypothesis in the Real Estate Market. Supply … 267

specific conditions of interaction between supply and demand, as discussed in the

conclusions (Sect. 5).

2 Market Structure in Real Estate Sector

Operating in the real estate market means acknowledging the multiplicity, diversity
and complexity presented by the demand and the supply of properties. The real
estate market cannot be simplified as a unitary one, but it is divided into sub-markets
according to the price level, the location models, the type of real estate, and much
more [19].
The analysis of market structure in the real estate sector is aimed at defining the
local, technical, economic and social context of the real estate data, and the behavior
of the supply and the demand, for the purpose of forecasting the market value.
The framework provided by the economic theory regarding market structure,
however, mainly refers, if not exclusively, to independent and mono-functional
(usually movable) goods; on the other hand, the real estate market is made up of
multifunctional assets that can have multiple intended uses.
Even in the simplification owing to the passage from hypothetical markets to the
real ones, it is clear that in the short term and in conditions of partial equilibrium,
for the real estate sector none of the market structure can be excluded “a priori” in
concrete situations, with the exception of the competitive perfect market, for which
the homogeneity of the real estate product cannot be assumed [10].
The structure of real estate market can be classified by the type of property,
according to: the demand and the supply (applicants and bidders—one, few, many;
companies, consumers, investors); the product (single, differentiated with or without
substitutes, homogeneous); the price elasticity (zero, high, medium, low); the market
entry conditions (blocked, semi-free and free); the price formation mechanism
(single, limited and unlimited discretionary, discriminated and indeterminate) [12].
Sometimes, there are specific conditions that foreshadow the market form of
monopoly. It may happen that a company builds on an area of the city center with
high building density, in the absence of competitors: in this case, the monopolist can
come to bargain with any single buyer making him pay the maximum price that he
is willing to shell out. In summary, there is only one seller and numerous buyers,
the product is without substitutes, the market entry conditions are blocked, and price
formation is discriminated [18].
In the market segment of new properties, bidders can divide the market by areas
or territorial areas with overt or tacit agreements; in areas of expansion for the urban
cities, several companies can accommodate the price of larger companies with a
higher number of construction sites or for a longer time. In these contingences, condi-
tions of oligopoly are created, with few sellers and numerous buyers, the nature of the
product is homogeneously differentiated, the market entry conditions are blocked,
and the price formation is discriminated [8].
268 P. Morano et al.

In the real estate sector, there are also examples of bilateral monopoly between
two parties (buyer and seller) in particular situations related to the position and
the configuration of the properties, such as the so-called urban wrecks on public
spaces, which can only be purchased by owners of neighboring properties, or the
synergistic value associated with the annexation of rooms of neighboring apartments.
In summary, the bilateral monopoly is constituted by one buyer and one seller, the
nature of the product is unique, the market entry conditions are blocked, and the
price formation is indeterminate [2].
In the real estate market of second-use properties, the monopolistic competition is
the most frequent form, which can occur where the bidder can exercise discretionary
power on the price, linked to the spontaneous differentiation of the apartments of
the buildings of one neighborhood, but he faces competition from other owners that
supply their properties. In short, there are numerous buyers and numerous sellers,
the nature of the product is differentiated (in the used apartment market, the differ-
entiation is at least for location and condition of maintenance and conservation), the
market entry condition is free, and the formation of the price is discretionary [4].

3 Oligopsony Hypothesis?

It is evident that the first decade of the second millennium completely revolutionized
the financial markets and the related logics. This contingence has generated markets
dominated by uncertainty, a very high volatility of values and a worrying aversion to
the investment risk [21, 22]. This was a crisis that transversally affected many asset
classes, including the real estate sector. In fact, the fixed milestones of the real estate
market—the principles and rules, and the behavior of the operators—could seem to
be structurally changed.
It is a shared experience by those who have consulted real estate agents for the sale
of their properties that they are sometimes reluctant to formulate value judgments,
especially in the current situation of uncertainty firstly related to the 2007 economic
crisis and then to the diffusion of the Covid-19 pandemic. They instead tend to
invite the property owner to directly indicate the asking price, leaving the task of
concluding the transaction either to the market or to the “luck of a meeting”. This
contingence has been especially widening in small provincial towns, in which the
demand contraction has been causing the difficulty to identify reliable comparables
for the assessment of the market values. Therefore, the common opinion is that in
many cities a market does not exist anymore, as every transaction is unique because
it is strongly linked to the individual characteristics of the buyer and the seller.
In these specific conditions, it is legitimate to ask whether the logic used up to this
moment to interpret the price formation mechanisms could be still usable or whether
it is possible to integrate it with new paradigms.
Normally, in the real estate market the demand is proportionate to the supply,
so that the interactive game means that the discretion of prices is very limited,
Oligopsony Hypothesis in the Real Estate Market. Supply … 269

and the unit prices are substantially leveled, i.e., unit prices are almost homoge-
neous. However, in some situations the interrelationships between the supply and
the demand are far from this assumption: this is the case of atypical, slow, static
markets, where the situation seems to recall the oligopsony market form.
An oligopsony is a market form in which the number of buyers is small, whereas
the number of sellers in theory could be large. This typically happens in a market
where numerous suppliers are competing to sell their products to a small number of
more powerful buyers, that have a major advantage over the sellers: they can play
off one supplier against another, thus lowering their costs.
This kind of market form usually occurs in specific economic situations, such as
that of labor [1], fir lumber [11], and agricultural products [6, 9, 14].
Therefore, an issue to be dealt by the valuers could be: in specific conditions,
could the oligopsony form be suitable for real estate market in a time of economic
crisis?

4 Case Study

Although at this stage of the research, it is not yet possible to provide a clear and
exhaustive answer to the question formulated above, in this work it has been decided
at least to confirm the existence of the hypotheses characterizing the oligopsony
market. The way is to detect condition of pulverization of the supply in the face of a
reduction of the demand, as outlined by the high discretion of the asking prices.
The idea has been to investigate the asking prices of second-use condominium
apartments in the Municipality of Cosenza (Southern Italy). In particular, 402 data
about properties for sale have been collected from real estate agencies. Furthermore,
the detected data have been organized and classified according to homogeneous
territorial areas (named “microzones”) as regards to exogenous factors (accessibility,
presence of services, building characteristics, green areas, pedestrian zones, etc.),
defined by the Observatory of the Real Estate Market (OMI) of the Italian Revenue
Agency (Table 1) and with reference to the first semester of 2019.
The data collected have been segmented according to the size factor, by consid-
ering a subdivision in “small” apartments (less than 80 m2 ), “medium” apartments
(from 80 to 150 m2 ) and “large” apartments (larger than 150 m2 ).
Each property has been considered as “subject” for which the asking price is
assessed through a comparative procedure that involves all the other properties,
considered as “comparables”. In particular, the single-parameter method has been
used to implement a market approach method [3]. First, in each considered market
segment, the average unit price pj has been calculated as:
n
Pi
p j = i=1
n
i=1 Si
270 P. Morano et al.

Table 1 Detected asking prices classified according to the OMI microzone subdivision
Zone Description Data Unitary average OMI quotation min OMI quotation max
number price (e/m2 ) (e/m2 ) (e/m2 )
B1 Central 140 1,106.70 1,300.00 1,450.00
B2 Central 12 1,365.00 1,300.00 1,900.00
C1 Semi-central 151 1,082.75 1,300.00 1,550.00
C2 Semi-central 20 703.45 790.00 1,150.00
D1 Peripheral 66 1,096.14 1,050.00 1,300.00
D2 Peripheral 3 496.85 690.00 990.00
R1 Suburban – 345.00 495.00
R2 Suburban 10 792.45 Not available
Total 402

where Pi are the detected asking price of the j comparables and S i their corresponding
commercial surfaces. Then, the asking price of the subject has been determined as:

V0 = p j · S0

where S 0 is the subject’s surface. Finally, the percentage divergence between the
detected asking price and the assessed asking price has been determined.
Table 2 shows an example of the computational processing carried out for the
typology of the small apartments of the C2 microzone. The same implementation has
been developed for all the typologies—small, medium, and large—of all the micro-
zones that constitute—from a property market point of view—the city of Cosenza,
except for the D2 and R1 microzones, for which the collected data are not significant
for the analysis. Table 3 reports the descriptive statistics of the calculated divergences.
The analysis has revealed an important inhomogeneity that goes beyond the toler-
ability thresholds that could be accepted for the assessments, even using a single
comparison parameter. Except for the B2 microzone, in all areas there are percentage
divergences that overcome 100% (for a “medium” apartment in the B1 microzone and
for a “small” apartment in the C1 microzone the values of the percentage divergence
are higher than 300%). Totally, the average value of the percentage divergences for
all the microzones is equal to about 32%, with the highest value equal to about 47%
in the C2 microzone.
Therefore, this dispersion of the data values constitutes, for the case study
analyzed, a detector of a market anomaly, related to an excessive “arbitrariness”—i.e.,
without an effective linkage with the local market behaviors—in the identification of
the asking prices. In fact, even if they are generally leveled at the market values by the
ordinary dynamics that characterize the formation mechanism of the selling prices,
in specific situations an irrational dispersion of the asking prices can generate a short
circuit in the implementation of the appraisal methodology, based on the comparison
of the property subject with similar properties for which the selling prices are known.
Oligopsony Hypothesis in the Real Estate Market. Supply … 271

Table 2 Divergence between detected asking prices and assessed asking prices for the C2
microzone
Surface (m2 ) Detected asking Unitary detected Assessed asking Divergence (%)
price (e) asking price (e/m2 ) price (e)
Small apartments
20.00 18,000.00 900.00 13,887.15 29.62
52.00 26,000.00 500.00 36,106.60 38.87
68.00 42,000.00 617.65 47,216.33 12.42
70.00 42,000.00 600.00 48,605.04 15.73
70.00 42,000.00 600.00 48,605.04 15.73
70.00 65,000.00 928.57 48,605.04 33.73
77.00 55,000.00 714.29 53,465.55 2.87
Medium apartments
88.00 35,000.00 397.73 56,764.57 62.18
100.00 39,000.00 390.00 64,505.19 65.40
103.00 89,000.00 864.08 66,440.35 33.95
105.00 74,000.00 704.76 67,730.45 9.26
106.00 100,000.00 943.40 68,375.51 46.25
107.00 59,000.00 551.40 69,020.56 16.98
107.00 85,000.00 794.39 69,020.56 23.15
120.00 38,000.00 316.67 77,406.23 103.70
140.00 115,000.00 821.43 90,307.27 27.34
147.00 98,000.00 666.67 94,822.63 3.35
Large apartments
150.00 50,000.00 333.33 137,903.23 175.81
300.00 350,000.00 1,166.67 275,806.45 26.90
310.00 390,000.00 1,258.06 285,000.00 36.84

5 Conclusions

What has been discussed in this research should probably stimulate the scientific
and professional operators in the real estate sector to reflect on the need for a most
appropriate interpretation of the phenomena that occur in the price formation in
specific conditions, in which the oligopsony market form could be recognized. In a
historical time characterized by a high volatility and complexity typical of the post-
modern age, the appraisal discipline also has the task of proposing solutions capable
of responding coherently to the needs of the changing society. It has to reconcile the
needs of systematization and schematization recalled by the International Valuation
Standards with the practical risk emergencies: although the valuers are appropriately
learning to control and monitor these conditions, they could be further investigated
from an economic point of view.
272 P. Morano et al.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of the divergence between detected asking prices and assessed asking
prices for all the microzones of the city of Cosenza
Microzone Data (n°) Min value (%) Max value (%) Average (%) Std. deviation (%)
B1
Small 22 0.70 85.12 29.40 22.65
Medium 74 0.22 310.42 32.63 105.22
Large 44 0.03 68.20 18.44 16.41
B2
Small 2 6.31 6.74 6.53 0.30
Medium 5 9.18 73.44 36.30 24.02
Large 5 20.22 49.27 31.99 10.60
C1
Small 24 1.31 302.44 43.42 62.40
Medium 87 0.44 144.34 26.30 23.43
Large 40 0.72 88.77 25.11 20.47
C2
Small 7 2.87 38.87 21.28 12.99
Medium 10 3.35 103.70 39.16 30.78
Large 3 26.90 175.81 79.85 83.25
D1
Small 11 6.14 79.11 33.18 20.76
Medium 41 4.82 168.09 35.79 35.06
Large 14 7.82 100.30 30.55 24.73
R2
Small 4 4.29 101.40 40.04 42.56
Medium – – – – –
Large 6 0.16 26.69 13.78 10.24

The case study analyzed has pointed out how the economic crisis has considerably
reduced the amount of demand, which appears significantly lower than that of supply.
It is not surprising that there is a very large number of properties supplied on the
market with long exposure times in the face of very low demand and with limited
availability to purchase in relation to the selling prices. These are conditions that
confirm that some real estate markets are closer to structure of oligopoly on the hand
of the demand, or rather of oligopsony. Furthermore, this contingence has determined
that the asking prices, on the one hand, could be very far from the final selling prices,
on the other hand, could be completely disconnected from the local market conditions,
by creating a difficulty of the price leveling and, consequently, the impossibility to
implement an appropriate assessment method based on the comparison paradigm.
The research has highlighted the cogence, in the assessment of the property market
values, to properly work on the market structure, in order to specifically define the
Oligopsony Hypothesis in the Real Estate Market. Supply … 273

characteristics of the supply and the demand, not only from a descriptive point of
view as it can be ordinarily recognized in the scientific reference, but also from a
quantitative one, in order to adequately involve in the market value provisions other
factors, e.g. the weight and the effects on the future trends of the socio-economic
variables. In fact, the assessment procedures are mainly focused on the elaborations
on the technical and physical factors of the properties, probably underestimating the
incidence of socio-economic variables, such as people’s incomes, motivation to sell
and buy, composition of households, time spent at home, etc., especially in specific
conditions in which new market structure can be identified.
Therefore, future research should focus on the operational procedures to be used
in specific contexts, by defining practical tools able to aim at new evaluation frontiers.

References

1. Bhaskar V, Manning A, To T (2002) Oligopsony and monopsonistic competition in labor

markets. J Econ Perspect 16(2):155–174
2. Bowley AL (1928) Bilateral monopoly. Econ J 38(152):651–659
3. Ciuna M, De Ruggiero M, Manganelli B, Salvo F, Simonotti M (2017) Automated valuation
methods in atypical real estate markets using the mono-parametric approach. In: International
conference on computational science and its applications. Springer, Cham, pp 200–209
4. Dixit AK, Stiglitz JE (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. Am
Econ Rev 67(3):297–308
5. Gabrielli L, Giuffrida S, Trovato MR (2018) Real estate landscapes and the historic city: on
how looking inside the market. In: International symposium on new metropolitan perspectives.
Springer, Cham, pp 269–276
6. Just RE, Chern WS (1980) Tomatoes, technology, and oligopsony. Bell J Econ 584–602
7. International Valuation Standards Committee (2020) International valuation standards. Avail-
able online: www.ivsc.org
8. Kai YU (2007) The research of the real estate price’s formation mechanism under our country
oligopoly. Urban Stud 3
9. Koontz SR, Garcia P, Hudson MA (1993) Meatpacker conduct in fed cattle pricing: an
investigation of oligopsony power. Am J Agric Econ 75(3):537–548
10. Kouisoyiannis A (1981) Microeconomia. EtasLibri, Milano
11. Mead WJ (1966) Competition and oligopsony in the Douglas fir lumber industry. Univ of
California Press
12. Mollica E (1994) L’analisi di mercato nella procedura di stima. In: Genio Rurale 5, Edagricole
13. Roberts J, Sonnenschein H (1977) On the foundations of the theory of monopolistic
competition. Econometrica: J Econ Soc 101–113
14. Rogers RT, Sexton RJ (1994) Assessing the importance of oligopsony power in agricultural
markets. Am J Agric Econ 76(5):1143–1150
15. Salvo F, Morano P, De Ruggiero M, Tajani F (2020) Environmental health valuation through
real estate prices. In: International symposium: new metropolitan perspectives. Springer, Cham,
pp 768–778
16. Schram JF (2006) Real estate appraisal. Rockwell Publishing
17. Segerson K (2001) Real estate and the environment: an introduction. J Real Estate Finance
Econ 22(2):135
18. Sharkey W (1983) The theory of natural monopoly. Cambridge Books
19. Simonotti M (1997) La stima immobiliare. Utet Libreria, Torino
20. Simonotti M (2019) Valutazione immobiliare standard. Nuovi metodi, Stimatrix
274 P. Morano et al.

21. Simonotti M, Salvo F, Ciuna M, De Ruggiero M (2016) Measurements of rationality for a

scientific approach to the market-oriented methods. J Real Estate Lit 24(2):403–427
22. Tajani F, Morano P, Salvo F, De Ruggiero M (2019) An evaluation model for an effective risk
assessment in the rent to buy property market. Property Manage
23. Tajani F, Morano P, Salvo F, De Ruggiero M (2019) Property valuation: the market approach
optimized by a weighted appraisal model. J Property Invest Financ
24. Wei-Da K (2012) Real estate tax, market structure and housing price. Econ Theory Bus Manage
32(01):10
How Many Data for a Reliable
Assessment? Accuracy of Models
and Number of Comparables
in Automated Valuation Models (AVMs)

Agostino Valier

Abstract Automated valuation models are increasingly used in appraisals. In some

circumstances, their use provides accurate estimates with advantages in terms of
time and cost of the process. Besides the programming capability, the reliability of
an automated model depends on the data it has to train and verify its outcomes. In liter-
ature, many researches test the predictive capabilities of models without investigating
whether similar performance would have been achieved with less data. The issue is
crucial for evaluators, who aim to optimise effectiveness (accuracy) while reducing
cost (data retrieval) in order to gain a competitive advantage over the industry. The
research aims to test whether there is a minimum dataset size with which AVMs
achieve their maximum performance. Tests were conducted on increasing sizes of
the dataset in order to observe the behaviour of the models as the number of data
increases. Three econometric models (Linear, polynomial and logarithmic regres-
sion) and three machine learning models (Regression tree, Random forest and Nearest
neighbors) were tested. The results confirm that there is a minimum dataset size only
for the machine learning models, whereas the hedonic models show little correla-
tion with the amount of data. However, the degree of accuracy of the models seems
to depend not only on the number of samples but also on the amount and type of
predictors.

Keywords AVM · Machine learning · Valuation · Real estate · Accuracy

A. Valier (B)
Department of Cultures of Project, University Iuav of Venice, Dorsoduro 2196, 30123 Venice,
Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 275
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_19
276 A. Valier

1 Introduction. Operating Conditions in the Use of AVMs

The use of Automated Valuation Models (hereinafter also referred to as AVMs)

is becoming increasingly common in the valuation of individual assets or groups of
assets. Compared to traditional manual appraisals, AVMs offer significant advantages
in terms of speed, cost and accuracy of outcomes.
Previously, AVMs were based on hedonic econometric models alone. The subse-
quent advent of self-learning models has greatly increased their usability and effec-
tiveness. To summarise the difference between the two types of AVMs, it may be
useful to adopt the well-known terminology of Kauko and D’Amato [7]: orthodox
models on the one hand, heretical models on the other. The orthodox models employ a
hedonic approach, quantifying the relationship between the price of the property and
its features. Heretical models, on the other hand, take a statistical approach, reading
patterns emerging from the distribution of data. While hedonic models directly result
in the numerical value of the price, machine learning models in turn produce algo-
rithms with which it is possible to process new data (i.e. new real property to be
estimated) and from these obtain the value of the price variable.
The emergence of machine learning models has brought considerable advantages
in terms of estimation accuracy. This quality is measured by the accuracy parameter,
which corresponds to the difference between the actual values that the assets have
recorded on the market and the value assigned to them by the AVMs. All the literature
agrees that machine learning models are more accurate than hedonic models [4, 19]
Research has devoted extensive attention to the prediction capabilities of AVMs,
going so far as to develop algorithms with very high accuracy values. Less effort
has been put into investigating the operational conditions under which AVMs are
used. One of the main obstacles that evaluators face when approaching automatic
evaluation models is the uncertainty about how much and which data they need
to have in order to obtain reliable models. The literature does not yet provide an
unambiguous and generally accepted answer as to what is the optimal dataset size
for the best performing AVM.
The research aims to investigate the size of the datasets used to train and test
real estate AVMs. The goals are twofold. On the one hand, to observe whether the
predictive ability of the models is directly proportional to the number of data used.
On the other hand, to verify what is the minimum number of data with which the
valuation model reaches its maximum performance in terms of predictive ability.

2 Background. The Link Between Models and Data

in the Literature

Each evaluation model needs a dataset on which to train and test its outcomes. The
size of the datasets concerns both the number of cases (n) and the number of predictors
(p), i.e. the variables describing each case.
How Many Data for a Reliable Assessment? Accuracy of Models … 277

Regarding the number of samples, the datasets used for the development of AVM
in the literature have various sizes. In his analysis of 53 articles, Valier [18] identifies
for the number of assets used in each paper a distribution with minimum value 40,
lower quartile 300, median 2,266, upper quartile 9,795 and maximum value 90,275.
Thus, an average size of about 2,000 cases.
There is little research that relates the effectiveness of AVMs to the number of
samples used. Generally, the literature uses all the data available to the authors to
optimise the models, without investigating whether similar predictive performance
results would have been achieved with less data. However, there are some exceptions.
Do and Grudnitski [5] show that their model registers error rates of less than 5% in
40% of the cases, while multiple regression is below this threshold in only 20% of the
cases. Nguyen and Cripps [17] questioned why previous articles comparing neural
networks and multiple regression had conflicting results. Conducting the experiment
on different dimensions of the dataset, they find that the neural networks outperform
the hedonic model only after the 500 cases employed by the model.
Predictors generally coincide with parameters describing assets or their context
and some macroeconomic indicators. Metzner and Kindt [14] operate an extensive
literature review identifying 407 parameters used in AVMs. Hedonic models, due to
their statistical limitations of multicollinearity, work with a small number of vari-
ables. In contrast, machine learning models can work with a very large number of
variables. This allows for the inclusion of variables that are not strictly related to
market fundamentals, such as proxy variables indicating the sentiment of market
participants [6].
Despite the wide variety of predictors that can be used by machine-learning tech-
niques, surveys of valuation practitioners show that professional practice always
employs market fundamentals as information sources for drafting estimates [9, 11].
The reasons for this may lie in widespread scepticism about the possibility of using
new economic approaches to property valuation. They may also lie in the difficulty
that valuation agencies—especially small ones—have in accessing non-public data
such as those recorded by apps or social networks. However, there is no evidence of
a direct proportionality between the number of variables used and the effectiveness
of the model [2, 10, 16].

3 Methodology. Testing Models at Increasing Dataset Sizes

Six models were used to predict the values: three hedonic models and three machine
learning models. For the former, three regression analyses were chosen: linear, loga-
rithmic and polynomial. For the machine learning typology the following AVMs
were chosen: Regression Tree, Random Forest and Nearest Neighbors (Table 1). The
choice of comparing the two macro-types of automatic evaluation models follows
a research methodology already shared by many authors in order to compare, once
again, the performance of econometric models with that of self-learning models [3,
8, 15].
278 A. Valier

Table 1 Models used in the

Hedonic models Linear regression
research
Polynomial regression (degree = 2)
Logarithmic regression (base = e)
Machine learning models Regression tree
Random forest
Nearest neighbors

Two tests are conducted: the general test and the test on increasing sizes. The
general test measures the accuracy of the models on the entire dataset of 1416
samples. The test on increasing sizes divides the 1416 dataset into 40 equal parts,
each containing 35 or 36 cases. The two tests are then compared.
Tests on increasing dataset sizes have also been conducted by other authors in the
literature [1, 13, 20]. Their aim is to observe the behaviour of AVMs as the amount
of data increases. The differences between the various subsets are only a few units
(35 or 36 residential units) in order to observe the behaviour of AVMs in detail. The
cases were ordered randomly, in order to avoid statistical arrangements that would
alter the behaviour of the models.
The machine learning model schemes were taken from the online library Sklearn.
At each step the model is refined using the RandomizedSearchCV tool. Once the
optimal parameters have been identified, the accuracy is measured on the respective
testing set. The RandomizedSearchCV tool subjects the models to n iterations, in
this research n = 500. Each iteration assigns a random value to the parameters within
the range set by the authors. Through a k-fold cross validation -in this research, k
= 5—the parameters with the highest predictive capacity are selected. For each test,
the parameters identified by the k-fold cross validation as optimal for the specific
characteristics and size of the dataset were used. Table 2 shows the parameters used.
The effectiveness of the model is then measured on the data of the testing set. The
indicator used is the Mape (Mean absolute percentage error), whose formula is as
follows:

Table 2 The hyperparameters tested with RandomizedSearchCv tool

Name Model in Sklearn Hyperparameter Range
Regression tree DecisionTreeRegressor ‘max-depth’ (1, 25)
‘criterion’ [‘mse’, ‘friedman_mse’,
‘mae’]
‘splitter’ [‘best’, ‘Random’]
Random forest RandomForestRegressor ‘n_estimators’ (1, 20)
‘max_depth’ (1, 25)
K-Nearest Neighbors KNeighborsRegressor ‘algorithm’ [‘auto’, ‘ball_Tree’, ‘kd_
Tree’, ‘brute’]
‘n_Neighbors’ (1, 20)
How Many Data for a Reliable Assessment? Accuracy of Models … 279

Table 3 The table used to report the results of the test

Model 1 Model 2 …
Within 10% No. of cases (in % of total cases) with MAPE less than 10% … …
Within 15% No. of cases (in % of total cases) with MAPE less than 15% … …
Within 20% … … …
Within 30% … … …
Whitin 50% … . …

N  
1  Yi − y i 


· 100
N i=1 yi

where:
N is the number of all samples;
y is the actual value of the sample;
ŷ is the predicted value of the sample.
All values are expressed with the Mape indicator. Where this parameter assumed
values greater than 300, these values were replaced by the value of 300. This choice
was made to avoid statistical outliers creating excessive variance in the results. The
results of the quantity and type tests were collected using Table 3, which is also used
by many practitioners.

4 Data: 1,400 Properties in Turin

The research uses as data the offer prices of 1416 residential units in the year 2013
in the Italian city of Turin. These prices have been collected by reading real estate
sales ads. In order to implement the information contained in the original dataset,
information from the Oict (Osservatorio Immobiliare Città di Torino) was added.
This observatory is managed by the City of Turin, the Polytechnic University of
Turin and the local Chamber of Commerce. It can be found at the website: http://
www.oict.polito.it. It collects the city’s real estate prices annually since 2000. Oict
divides the city into 40 micro-zones. The micro-zones and their average sales price
for the year 2013 were then added to the dataset.
The dataset used has 13 variables, described in Table 4.
Missing values of the variables ‘Locali (rooms)’, ‘Bagni (bathrooms)’, ‘Balconi
(terraces)’, ‘Box (parking space)’, ‘Affacci (facades)’, ‘Cantina (cellars)’, ‘Piano
(floor level)’ and ‘Piani edificio (floors)’ were replaced with the most frequent
value of the respective variable. This replacement technique, called imputation, is
frequently used to deal with missing data in large datasets. It consists of replacing
280 A. Valier

Table 4 The variables of dataset

Variable (Italian name) Description
Locali (rooms) Number of rooms
Bagni (bathrooms) Number of bathrooms
Balconi (terraces) Number of terraces
Box (parking space) Number of parking spaces
Affacci (facades) Number of facades
Cantina (cellars) Number of cellars
Ascensore (lift) Lift (presence or absence)
Piano (floor level) Floor level
Piani edificio (floors) Number of floors in the building
Microzona (microzone) Microzone in the local real estate monitor
Mq (square meters) Surface area (in square meters)
Prezzi medi (mean value) Mean value (e/Mq (square meters)) in the microzone
Prezzo (price) Total offer price in euros

missing values with the mean value or the most frequent value of the variable to
which the missing value belongs. In this research, the most frequent value was used
(see Table 5). After the imputation process, the dataset has 1416 samples, each of
them described by 13 variables.

5 Results and Interpretation. The Random Behaviour

in Hedonic Models and the Need for Training in Machine
Learning Models

5.1 General Test. The Increased Accuracy in Machine

Learning Models

The general test consists of the error rates (expressed in Mape values) that the six
models record in predicting the values of the testing set. The training set is 80% of
the total data (i.e. 1,133 samples) and the testing set is 20% of the total data (the
remaining 283 samples). The results are shown in Table 6.
Two main findings emerge from Table 6. The first is that there is a clear differ-
ence between the two categories: econometric models have high error rates, whereas
machine learning models have lower error rates. At the same time, each model has
similar behaviour to the other two models in its category. In the results of the three
hedonic AVMs, there is a difference of only 4 points between the best performance
(Linear Regression) and the worst performance (Logarithmic Regression). Similarly,
the machine learning models show a difference of about 2 points from the minimum
How Many Data for a Reliable Assessment? Accuracy of Models … 281

Table 5 Description of dataset

Variable Type Missing Range Mean (DeSt. Most
values Dev.) frequent
value
Locali (rooms) Numerical 1 1–13 3.72 (1.53) 3
Bagni Numerical 45 1–6 1.46 (0.69) 1
(bathrooms)
Balconi Numerical 135 0–5 1.23 (0.86) 1
(terraces)
Box (parking Numerical 450 0–2 0.31 (0.49) 0
space)
Affacci Numerical 278 1–6 2.1 (0.75) 2
(facades)
Cantina Numerical 278 0–3 0.70 (0.54) 1
(cellars)
Ascensore (lift) Dummy 0 0 (F)/1 (T)
Piano (floor Numerical 53 0–13 2.90 (2.20) 1
level)
Piani edificio Numerical 92 0–14 5.01 (2.23) 5
(floors)
Microzona Categorical 0 Thirteen different
(microzone) neighbourhoods in
Turin
Mq (square Numerical 0 24–900 108.10 (70.34) 75
meters)
Prezzi medi Numerical 0 1.523–4.242 2516.44 1.956
(mean value) (759.53)
Prezzo (price) Numerical 0 23.000–2.500.000 297.786,01 195.000
(262.590,50)

Table 6 General test accuracy results

Linear Logarithmic Polynomial Regression Random Nearest
regression regression regression tree forest neighbors
Mape 40.11 44.18 42.66 25.61 25.35 23.52

Mape (Nearest Neighbors) to the maximum Mape (Regression Tree). This suggests
that, within the same category, the behaviour of the models is very similar.
The second evidence is that the Mape values are too high to be used effectively in
evaluation practice. Machine learning models perform better, but a prediction error
of 25% is still too high to consider the model as reliable. The next question is whether
the two findings remain the same or whether they change in the next test (quantity
test). The test on increasing dataset sizes. Different behaviour between groups of
models.
282 A. Valier

The test on increasing sizes confirms some of the findings of the general test, while
denying others. Machine learning models continue to show better prediction perfor-
mance. However, the two categories of models no longer show similar behaviour
within each other. The three regression analyses linear, logarithmic, polynomial have
discordant behaviour.
Table 7 shows the accuracy results (expressed in Mape values) of the AVMs
trained and tested using the entire dataset of 1416 cases available.
Focusing on the value expressed by the results, the error rates expressed in Mape
always remain too high. Half of the tests carried out with the Random Forest model
fall within the 20% error margin, while the other machine learning models record far
fewer cases. The situation is even worse for econometric models: not even half of the
40 tests carried out with logarithmic regression and polynomial regression manage
to stay below the 50% error threshold (Table 7).
The results of the tests on the increasing size of the dataset are also represented
in the following graph (Fig. 1).

Table 7 Accuracy results measured on datasets of increasing size

Linear Logarithmic Polynomial (%)Regression Random (%)Nearest
regression regression regression tree (%) forest neighbors
(%) (%) (%)
Within 0 0 0 0 0 0
10%
Within 0 0 0 0 0 0
15%
Within 0 0 0 5 50 8
20%
Within 3 0 3 90 95 95
30%
Within 63 48 40 100 98 100
50%

Fig. 1 Accuracy results (expressed in Mape value) on increasing dataset size

How Many Data for a Reliable Assessment? Accuracy of Models … 283

Table 8 Statistical
Mean Standard deviation
description of
cross-validation results on the Linear regression 53.42 33.48
whole dataset Logarithmic regression 70.77 62.88
Polynomial regression 83.91 65.58
Regression tree 25.15 4.35
Random forest 21.53 7.20
Nearest neighbors 23.72 3.50

The line graph (Fig. 1) clearly shows the different behaviour between the two
categories. The lines representing machine learning models have high values (and
thus higher error rates in prediction) and a non-constant trend. On the contrary, the
lines representing AVM machine learning have a constant trend, similar to each other
and closer to the target value of zero. In order to be able to verify this evidence with
numbers, Table 8 shows the mean and standard deviation values of the models in the
40 tests performed from a minimum of 35 cases to a maximum of 1416.
The results confirm that artificial intelligence models have lower error rates
than traditional models. The standard deviation shows that the econometric models
register a highly variable trend among the 40 different Mape values corresponding to
the 40 tests performed on datasets of increasing size. The lines in the graph show that
only the linear regression and the logarithmic regression since sample no. 460 have
a more constant behaviour. Polynomial regression seems to have highly unsteady
behaviour and therefore unsuitable for value prediction.
In contrast, machine learning models provide similar error results even when
working with datasets of different sizes. Their predictive behaviour, except for the first
100 cases where it has higher than average values, always assumes the same levels of
performance. Regression Tree and Random Forest guarantee a greater homogeneity
of predictions, despite being stochastic procedures. Stochastic procedures are models
which, although they use the same data and parameters, do not guarantee the same
result at every iteration.
A homogeneous and constant trend in prediction error is a fundamental require-
ment in the evaluation of AVMs. A model that provides predictions that are too far
apart on the same data—or on separate datasets that largely contain common data—is
a random model. Because of its randomness it will therefore be considered unreliable
by the evaluators.
The numbers just described may not be representative because they also contain
tests carried out by models trained on only a few dozen cases. For this reason, tests
with little training data were evaluated separately from tests with a lot of training
data. Table 9 compares tests using cases 1–708 and tests using cases 709–1416. This
means that the second half benefited from training on more than 700 cases, in contrast
to the first half.
The advantages of training are clearly visible in the row “up to 20%” where
Random Forest records 80% of the tests. All machine learning models keep their
284 A. Valier

Table 9 Accuracy results measured on datasets of increasing size, categorised between models
with little training (sample 1 to sample 708) and models with more training (sample 709 to sample
1416)
From sample 1 to sample 708 From sample 709 to sample 1416
Lin Log Poly DT RF NN Lin Log Poly DT RF NN
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Within 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10%
Within 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15%
Within 0 0 0 5 20 0 0 0 0 5 80 15
20%
Within 5 0 5 80 90 90 0 0 0 100 100 100
30%
Within 55 55 5 100 95 100 70 40 75 100 100 100
50%

accuracy results within the upper limit of 30%. These values are certainly significant,
but the total absence of tests within the 15% threshold makes them unusable for mass
appraisal techniques.

6 Conclusions. The Size of Dataset Between Samples

and Predictors

The research conducted accuracy tests on six models—three econometric, three

machine learning—used to predict the value of real estate assets. The tests were
carried out on an increasing amount of data from a total dataset of 1400 residen-
tial units in the city of Turin. Two hypotheses were tested in the research. The first
hypothesis states that there is a direct proportionality between the number of cases in
the dataset and the predictive capacity of the models. The second hypothesis holds
that there is a minimum number of data, less than the maximum number of data avail-
able in the dataset, with which the evaluation models would achieve their maximum
predictive performance.
The first test conducted (general test) reports an absolute superiority of machine
learning models over traditional econometric models. This superiority had already
been confirmed by numerous contributions from scientific research. However, the
error rates are too high to qualify the model as reliable.
The second test (test on the increasing size of the dataset) was crucial as it rejected
the first hypothesis and partially accepted the second. It rejects the direct proportion-
ality between dataset size and model performance. In fact, it does not seem that the
increase in the number of available data affects the error rate of the models, except
for the first few hundred cases where the models still suffer from poor training.
How Many Data for a Reliable Assessment? Accuracy of Models … 285

The second hypothesis is partially accepted, as it is confirmed for machine learning

models but not for hedonic models. The former, in fact, after a minimum threshold of
about 200 cases, reach a margin of error that proves to be consistent with subsequent
increases in the number of cases. On the contrary, the regression analyses present a
very inconstant and random pattern, which does not seem to depend on the size of
the dataset.
However, the results obtained do not merely verify the two hypotheses underlying
the research, but open up a new question. In fact, the models always present an average
prediction error above the 25% error threshold. This value is insufficient to ensure the
reliability of an evaluation model. The maximum error acceptable to valuers is not
universally defined. An acceptable margin for the valuation of commercial property
is ± 10%. However, recent experience in the UK places this margin in the region of
± 15%, making it dependent on the degree of ‘specificity’ of the property: the more
specific the market segment, the greater the uncertainty allowed in estimating the
market value [12].
There are two possible reasons for this lack of effectiveness: the models adopted
and the data used. The first of the two possible causes can be ruled out, as there are
cases in the literature of authors who obtained high predictive performances with the
same models.
There are two possible reasons for this lack of effectiveness: the models adopted
and the data used. The first of the two possible causes can be ruled out, as there are
cases in the literature of authors who obtained high predictive per-formances with
the same models.
Moreover, the refinement step through the RandomizedSearchCCv tool allowed
to adopt the best performing hyperparameters for each test.
The cause of the low accuracy of the models may be the second possible cause,
namely the features of the data. The research considers the size of the dataset only
in terms of the number of cases (n), and not in terms of the number of predictors
(p), i.e. the variables describing each case. The predictors in the dataset are few
(13) and describe only the main property characteristics. Machine learning models
perform best with Big Data, i.e. groups of information of huge variety, volume and
speed. In addition, machine learning models can employ information sources other
than those that can be expressed in categorical or numerical data. First and foremost,
photographic images.
Future research will have to investigate the relationship between the predictive
capabilities of AVMs and the characteristics of the dataset, not only in terms of
number of samples but also in terms of number and type of predictors used.

References

1. Baldominos A, Blanco I, Moreno A, Iturrarte R, Bernardez O, Afonso C (2018) Identifying

real estate opportunities using machine learning. Appl Sci 8
286 A. Valier

2. Bisello A, Antoniucci V, Marella G (2020) Measuring the price premium of energy efficiency:
a two-step analysis in the Italian housing market. Energy Build 208
3. Ceh M, Kilibarda M, Lisec A, Bajat B (2018) Estimating the performance of random forest
versus multiple regression for predicting prices of the apartments. Int J Geo-Inform 7(5)
4. Cajias M (2018) Is there room for another hedonic model? The advantages of the GAMLSS
approach in real estate research. J Eur Real Estate Res 11(2)
5. Do AQ, Grudnitski G (1992) A neural network approach to residential property appraisal. The
Real Estate Appraiser 58
6. Glumac B, Des Rosiers F (2020) Practice briefing—automated valuation models (AVMs): their
role, their advantages and their limitations. J Property Invest Finance (ahead-of-print)
7. Kauko T, D’Amato M (2008) Mass appraisal methods. Wiley Blackwell
8. Kok N, Martínez-Barbosa CA, Koponen EL (2017) Big data in real estate? From manual
appraisal to automated valuation. J Portfolio Manage 43(6)
9. Lowies GA, Hall JH, Cloete CEC (2015) The role of market fundamentals vs Market sentiment
in property investment decision-making in South Africa. J Real Estate Lit 23(2)
10. Mangialardo A, Micelli E (2019) Off-site retrofit to regenerate multi-family homes: evidence
from some European experiences. Smart Innov Syst Technol 101
11. Mangialardo A, Micelli E (2020) Reconstruction or reuse? How real estate values and planning
choices impact urban redevelopment. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(10)
12. Matysiak G (2017) Report for TEGoVA the accuracy of automated valuation
models (AVMs). https://www.tegova.org/data/bin/a591190c05b2c3_Geoge_Matysiak_Valuat
ion_Report.pdf. Last access: 20th Jan 2021
13. McCluskey WJ, McCord M, Davis PT, Haran M, McIlhatton D (2013) Prediction accuracy in
mass appraisal: a comparison of modern approaches. J Property Res 30(4)
14. Metzner S, Kindt A (2018) Determination of the parameters of automated valuation models
for the hedonic property valuation of residential properties: a literature-based approach. Int J
Housing Markets Anal 11(1)
15. Mullainathan S, Spiess J (2017) Machine learning: an applied econometric approach. J Econ
Perspect 31(2)
16. Napoli G, Giuffrida S, Trovato MR (2019) A paradigm interpreting the city and the analytic
network process for the management of urban transformations. Smart Innov Syst Technol 100
17. Nguyen N, Cripps A (2001) Predicting housing value: a comparison of multiple regression
analysis and Artificial neural networks. J Real Estate Res 22(3)
18. Valier A (2020) Who performs better? AVMs vs hedonic models. J Property Invest Financ
38(3)
19. Valier A, Micelli E (2020) Automated models for value prediction: a critical review of the
debate [I modelli automatici per la predizione del valore: Una rassegna critica del dibattito].
Valori e valutazioni 24
20. Wyman D, Seldin M, Worzala E (2011) A new paradigm for real estate valuation ? J Property
Invest Financ 29 (4/5)
An Application of the Market
Comparison Approach for Assessing
the Natural Component Incidence
on the Housing Prices

Maria Rosaria Guarini, Francesco Sica, Debora Anelli,

and Pierluigi Morano

Abstract The technological and industrial development impacts on the climate and
natural environment leading the European Commission to promote strategic actions
aimed at (i) reducing the amount of permeable surface area, and (ii) increasing
the presence of green areas in urbanised contexts. With reference to a residential
properties sold in the local real estate market in the first half of 2019 and located in
a specific municipal trade area of the Rome city in Italy, the work aims to determine
the average incidence of the natural component on housing prices. In particular, the
determination of the incidence of the considered set of variables is assessed through
the Market Comparison Approach application which, due to its simplicity of use,
is well suited to be adopted by evaluators for assessing and testing importance of
including the green elements in the built environment and the achievement of the
sustainable goals set by the Agenda 2030.

Keywords Real estate market · Urban green spaces · Market comparison

approach · Housing prices

M. R. Guarini (B) · F. Sica

Department of Architecture and Design, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Flamina 359, 00196
Rome, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Sica
e-mail: [email protected]
D. Anelli · P. Morano
Department of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry (DICATECh),
Polytechnic University of Bari, Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Morano
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 287
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_20
288 M. R. Guarini et al.

1 Introduction

Effects from technological and industrial development on climate condition, envi-

ronment quality and natural capital integrity, the 2007 sub-prime mortgage crisis, as
well as the meteorological and epidemiological shocks, that have and are influencing
the world economy and society in the last 15 years (2007–2022), have contributed
to make cities more complex, highly heterogeneous and socially dysequal [13, 32,
34, 35, 38]. In the light of these, urban realities, especially but not only in the most
industrialised countries, appear to be increasingly characterised by uneven levels of
inequality in the economic, social, environmental and productive apparatus, with
consequences, also in the real estate sector, and, in particular, on the co-creation
processes of property prices [9, 10, 22, 23, 26].
The elements that make up and characterise the context in which the properties
are located have a positive or negative influence on their market values [31, 46, 49].
Numerous studies in literature have investigated the factors modifing the market
values of residential properties [8, 11, 12, 16, 29, 30]. Among these, the analysis
conducted by Ferlan et al. [20] showed that “[…] location of property is most impor-
tant factor in the evaluation of value and represents one of the most demanding
elements of analysis”. The study of [1], aimed at research on effects of location
and neighbourhood attributes on housing values in metropolitan Lagos, showed as
these attributes are variables that explain the 70% of the spatial variation in housing
values. Other studies have highlighted how among the externalities that affect the
properties market value, the green spaces can be thus what people would consider
before buying a house. This in function of the capacity by nature capital assets at
providing goods and services, i.e. Ecosystem Services (ES), that may be helpful
to ecosystem restoration, social equality and economic well-being. In a nutshell,
the ES are spelled out as services supplied by different type of ecosystem in view
of prosperity and sustainable development. Due to possibility of tracking mainly
regulating, supporting and provisiong services, in services flow perspective the co-
creation market values processes are affected by intangible externalities that have
to be considered as possible drivers across the creation value process. Among the
main drivers/services the regulating and supporting services steer the market value
creation in a meaningful way [4, 5, 18, 27].
With regard to urban ecosystems, specific attention from the international scien-
tific community is placed on the need to include in the analysis of the dynamics of
economic, social and environmental development of cities also the ES that urban
greenery generates in the city. Thus, the European Commission’s policy provisions
on green deals and nature-based solutions orient the socio-economic growth of the
Member States on the basis also of the contributions by urban greenery in sustainable
urban planning, as well as for the capacity of adaptation and resilience to the effects
of climate change, but also for the influence on economic system [19, 21] this with
consequences on the real estate market, in particular on the urban property values
[3, 33, 37, 40, 43, 44, 47, 48].
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 289

The natural component of urbanized contexts, therefore, takes on a double value.

On the one hand, it is an element capable of sustaining an urban development from
the point of view of climate and the protection of natural resources [14, 41]. On the
other hand, it is a factor that influences the mechanisms of property price formation,
representing an element that buyers and operators in the local real estate market
take into account in the initial phases of negotiation [2]. The valuation of nature and
ecosystem services values by urban grenney in cities is attracting more and more
attention in modern discussions on environmental protection. It is most often asso-
ciated with monetary methods [7] and/or hedonic analysis [6, 15] when the assess-
ment is made with a large-scale size and numerous data are considered. Specifically,
the participation of natural services in the formation and differentiation of housing
prices is carried out by estimating the sensitivity of property prices to the differences
of quantity, type and quality of ecosystem services [25]. The Market Comparison
Approach (MCA) is used instead when the assessed sample is composed of few
data. It represents circumstance that characterises the normality of operating situa-
tions. The MCA, which belongs to the Market Oriented approach, one of the three
methods considered in the International Valuation Standards (IVS) [28], is config-
ured as a direct estimation procedure that allows to determine the implicit prices
of the analysis variables considered. This is done by comparing the goods to be
estimated and/or each of the goods that make up the statistical sample of analysis.
The MCA is a procedure based on adjustments and corrections in monetary terms,
to be made at property prices of comparable properties, analysing the differences
between the comparable sample’s characteristics and those of the property under
evaluation, of known characteristics and unknown price. In the MCA approach the
comparable sample’s characteristics are called aestimabilis and ineastimabilis vari-
ables—described in the following sections—whereas the property under evaluation
is denominated Subject. Among the ineastimabilis variables, for which it is artic-
ulated to determine the explicit marginal price directly, the natural component and
the ecosystem services can also be included [17]. In this way, the MCA allows the
analysis of the incidence of the variables for which it is not possible to quantify
directly the effect on housing prices on the basis of few available data.
The reminder of the paper is as follows: in Sect. 2 the aim of the work is explained,
in Sect. 3 the MCA approach implemented is described; in Sect. 4 the MCA is applied
to the study sample and the empirical evidences of the achieved results are discussed;
in Sect. 5 the final considerations on the work’s advantages and limits, as well as
future insights, are outlined.

2 Work Aim

This work is part of the general frame described. With the aim of determinating
the incidence of the natural component in the market value of urban properties, the
MCA is applied to a sample of properties surveyed in a semi-central area of the
Rome city (Italy). The analysis is carried out on a sample of 10 comparable flats
290 M. R. Guarini et al.

Fig. 1 Perimeter of the municipal trade area “C11-Marconi” (source https://wwwt.agenziaentrate.

gov.it/geopoi_omi/index.php)

for residential use, with a known expected property price, located in a portion of the
municipal territory that is homogeneous from a positional, urban planning, historical-
environmental, socio-economic point of view as well as for the presence of urban
services and infrastructures—also defined as a homogeneous municipal trade area,
in accordance with Presidential Decree no.138/1998—into which the Observatory of
the Real Estate Market (OMI) of the Inland Revenue has divided the city’s perimeter
(going to the link in Fig. 1’s footnote to investigate the Observatory of Real Estate
Market).
The MCA is applied according to the aestimabilis and ineastimabilis characteris-
tics of the comparable properties included in the study sample. For each of the char-
acteristics examined—especially with regard to the set of inaestimabilis variables for
which it is not possible to determine the explicit marginal price directly—the impact
on the price formation mechanism of the comparable properties has been determined
through:
1. real estate market analysis of the trade area considered and identification of the
aestimabilis and inestimabilis variables subject to analysis;
2. construction of the data table, i.e. a double-entry table whose rows are made up
of variables and columns of comparables, and choice of measurement scales for
each variable;
3. empirical determination of the marginal price of the aestimabilis variables of
each comparable of the study sample, and assessment of the marginal price of
the inaestimabilis variables;
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 291

4. calculation of the incidence of each ineastimabilis variable on housing prices,

with particular reference to the variables of the natural component of the study
area, for each comparable of the sample.

3 Materials and Method

3.1 Aestimabilis and Inaestimabilis Variables

In general, the parameters that influence the property values are divided into:
– External factors (extrinsic-positional): i.e. those factors capable of representing
the infrastructural level, quality and accessibility of public and transport services
existing in the area surrounding the building (transportation infrastructure,
educational, medical, commercial facilities and landscape features);
– Internal factors (intrinsic): they refer directly to the building and property unit’s
characteristics (size, shape, accessory rooms, panoramic view, floor level, state
of finishes, plant engineering equipment, economic/legal constraints, state of
occupancy).
Each of the factors stated can be measured in quantitative terms, using an appro-
priate measurement scale to support the explanation of the numerical value of
the analysis parameter considered. The knowledge of the qualitative/quantitative
measurement of each factor is preparatory to the estimate of the corresponding
marginal price.

3.2 The Market Comparison Approach (MCA)

The MCA is an appraisal procedure falling within the more general Market Approach
and aimed at determining the expected property value of a unit located in a specific
urban area. The methodology is based on the comparison between a property—the
object of assessment—of known intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics but unknown
price, defined Subject (S), and the j-esimal assets whose price (pj ), intrinsic and
extrinsic characteristics are known (x i,j , with j = 1, …, m and i = 1, …, n).
From a computational point of view, the algebraic function that links the property
value of the asset being assessed with the explanatory variables of the comparison
assets is:

S = L0 + p,1, j · x1, j + p,2, j · x2, j + · · · + p,m, j · xm, j (1)

in which:
S: Subject property value,
292 M. R. Guarini et al.

L 0 : known term,
p,m, j · xm, j : monomi made up of the product between the marginal price p ,j and
its characteristic x j of the jth comparable.
The Subject (S) property value, therefore, is obtained by subtracting two linear
and additive estimation functions, as reported in the following formula:

S − P j =L0 + L0 + p1, j · (x S,1 − x1, j )

+ p2, j · (xs,2 − x2, j ) + · · · + pm, j · (x S, j − xm, j ) (2)

where P j identifies the price recorded for the comparable jth. In this way, the unknown
S can be obtained by solving an algebraic expression of the type:

S = P j + p1, j · (x S,1 − x1, j ) + pm, j · (x S, j − xm, j ) (3)

The (3) represents the assessment function with which it is possible to determine
the incidence of the characteristics considered on the price of the asset being assessed.
In particular, with reference to the characteristics adopted in the analysis phase of
the comparable, the (3) can be rewritten as:


m 
m
Vs = Vaestimabilis + Vinaestimabilis (4)
j=1 j=1

Vaestimabilis and Vinaestimabilis derive from the product between the marginal prices
of each characteristic and the corresponding numerical value assigned through the
qualitative/quantitative scale used for the single characteristic.

3.2.1 Assessment of Marginal Prices of Aestimabilis Variables

The characteristics of the property that are involved in the determination of the
property price in a specific trade area are classified in the literature as aestimabilis
variables [24, 45]. These include, for example: the surface area of the property (SUP)
and the one of the balconies (SUB).
In the MCA, the corresponding marginal price (p,k, j aest ) for each aestimabilis
variables derived from the ratio:
Pj
p,k, j aest = n (5)
AVi, j + i=1 πi, j ∗ VAi, j

where: P j indicates the property price recorded of the comparable jth, AV i, j expresses
the value of the aestimabilis variable ith referred to the asset of comparison jth, πi, j
represent proportionality coefficients referred to each subscript variable considered.
The marginal price of AV i, j to be included within the assessment function (3) is
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 293

equivalent to the lower of the average marginal prices of the ith AV recorded in
correspondence of each asset of comparison surveyed in the territorial analysis.
The sum of the products between the marginal price and the corresponding
aestimabilis characteristics of the asset of comparison jth is equivalent to defining
the partial value Vaestimabilis which appears in the estimation function (3) of the
comparable considered.
Known the Vaestimabilis and P j the summary assessment of the representative
rate of the monetary value of the inaestimabilis variables is obtained through the
operation:

Vinaestimabilis, j = P j − Vaestimabilis, j (6)

3.2.2 Assessment of Marginal Prices of Inaestimabilis Variables

The marginal prices of the inaestimabilis characteristics that affect the formation
process of the expected property price of a property are defined starting from the
Vinaestimabilis, j representative the aggregate value V referred to the inaestimabilis of
the jth asset. The Vinaestimabilis, j is obtained from (6).
Depending on the numerical result of (6), that is the difference between
,
P j eVaestimabilis, j , , marginal prices are calculated (pinaest ) by setting an algebraic
equation of the type:

P j − Vaestimabilis, j = pi,, j inaest ∗ Vinaestimabilis, j (7)

From (7) the (8) is then obtained:

pi,, j inaest = (P − Vaestimabilis, j ) ∗ (Vinaestimabilis, j )−1 (8)

j

The (8) rewritten according to a matrix notation assumes the following connota-
tion:
     −1
pi, jnaest (n−k)×1
= P j − Vaestimabilis, j m×1 ∗ Vaestimabilis, j m×1
   T
= P j − Vaestimabilis, j m×1 ∗ Vaestimabilis, j m×1
  −1  T
∗ Vinaestimabilis, j m×1 ∗ Vinaestimabilis, j m×1 (9)
294 M. R. Guarini et al.

4 Case Study

The case study concerns the application of the MCA to a sample of 10 residential
properties located in the municipal trade area called “C11-Marconi” of the city of
Rome (Italy), whose boundaries are: to the North and West, the bundle of tracks
of the railway network subway; to the East and South by the Tevere rivers, which
represents an important blue-green way within the city (Fig. 1).
Figure 2 shows the location of the study sample within the homogeneous reference
trade area. Specifically, the properties are sold on the local real estate market in the
first half of 2019.
The survey area, belonging to the “Consolidated City Fabrics” tissue, is mainly
composed of “T2-Fabrics of twentieth-century expansion with a defined typology
and high settlement density” according to the technical rules for the implementation
of the current regulatory [39] plan and is characterized, along the Tevere river in the
eastern area, by the presence of partially disused industrial buildings, included in the
“Ostiense-Marconi” Urban Recovery Project, as well as by some broad tree-lined
roads and a widespread network of commercial services and offices (Fig. 3).
From the consultation of the real estate agents operating in the area, among the
characteristics originally considered by buyers and sellers in the negotiation phase of
similar residential properties located in the minucipal trade area under investigation,
those defined as price sensitive, that is those capable of determining a greater or
lesser incidence in the process of establishing the housing prices.

Fig. 2 Location of study properties in the perimeter of the trade area considered
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 295

Fig. 3 Overlapping cartographic drawings: “Systems and Rules” and “Quality Charter” for the
study area (source https://www.comune.roma.it/TERRITORIO/nic-gwt/ last accessed: 10/10/2023)

The factors identified are: the total surface [SUP] and the balcony surface [SUB] of
the property (aestimabilis variables); whereas the inaestimabilis ones are related to:
the floor level of the building [PIA], the maintenance status of the building [CONS],
the exposure [ESP], the level of difficulty in finding parking near the building where
is located the apartment [PAP]. Furthermore, have been considered among them also
the distance from: the nearest metropolitan public transport station by rail (train or
metro) [DMETRO], the urban public green spaces [DSV] and the Tevere river [DTV].
Each variable is measured using the scale proposed by Saaty [42]. While Saaty’s scale
has been most applied to resolve namely performance-based comparisons between
alternatives, in the current case-study it is employed according to a principle of
internal ordering of variables in function of their capacity of influencing the economic
value creation process. Table 1 shows the inestimabilis variables considered and the
corresponding measurement scales adopted. Tables 2 and 3 respectively show the
measurements of the inaestimabilis and aestimabilis characteristics of each property
considered. The selection exercise of analysis variables was made at using single
parameter in a not interlinkage view. To this correlation deepening between the
selected analysis factors is not implemented at different urban spatial scales (i.e.
neighborhoods).
By applying the procedure described in paragraph 3, the amount of the marginal
prices of the aestimabilis and ineastimabilis variables (Table 4) and the average
marginal price of the variables of the study sample (Table 5) are obtained.
In relation to the determination of the average marginal price of the variables
considered, the incidence of the ineastimabilis variables on the value of each
comparative property was calculated, represented with a line graph in Fig. 4.
296 M. R. Guarini et al.

Table 1 Inaestimabilis variables considered and range of corresponding values

N Variable name Scale of measurement
1 Floor [PIA] First floor: 1
Second floor: 2
Third floor: 3
2 Maintenance condition [CONS] Bad: 1
Good: 3
Excellent: 5
3 Exposure [ESP] Panoramic/attic: 5
Two-face: 3
Unique (internal or external): 1
4 Difficulty of parking nearest the residential unit Low: 5
[PAP] Average: 3
High: 1
5 Distance from the nearest public rail transport stop Less than 1 km:5
[DMETRO] Between 1 and 3 km: 3
More than 3 km: 1
6 Distance from the nearest public green spaces Less than 1 km:5
[DSV] Between 1 and 3 km: 3
More than 3 km: 1
7 Distance from the Tevere river [DTV] Less than 1 km:5
Between 1 and 3 km: 3
More than 3 km: 1

Table 2 Measurement of each aestimabilis characteristic of property

C01 C02 C03 C04 C05 C06 C07 C08 C09 C10
Housing price 340 335 370 295 298 350 279 250 219 329
(e thousand)
SUP (mq) 95.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 93.00 90.00 89.00 110.00
SUBX (mq) 9.00 4.00 6.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 9.00 0.00 2.50

Table 3 Measurement of each inaestimabilis characteristic of property

C01 C02 C03 C04 C05 C06 C07 C08 C09 C10
[PIA] 1.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00
[CONS] 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 3.00
[ESP] 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 3.00
[PAP] 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00
[DMETRO] 3.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 1.00
[DSV] 5.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 3.00
[DTV] 1.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 5.00
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 297

Table 4 Assessment of the marginal prices of the aestimabilis variables

SUP (e) SUB (e)
C01 247,049.61 6,865.38
C02 260,052.22 2,925.59
C03 260,052.22 4,368.88
C04 234,047.00 2,340.47
C05 260,052.22 2,340.47
C06 260,052.22 3,900.78
C07 241,848.56 585.12
C08 166,433.42 6,982.40
C09 215,843.34 -
C10 286,057.44 1,950.39

Table 5 Assessment of the average marginal price of each inaestimabilis variables considered
Inaestimabilis variables Average marginal price (e)
FLOOR [PIA] 20,263.99
MAINTENANCE CONDITION [CONS] 40,222.73
EXPOSURE [ESP] 41,241.16
DIFFICULTY OF PARKING NEAREST THE 27,948.26
RESIDENTIAL UNIT [PAP]
DISTANCE FROM THE NEAREST PUBLIC RAIL 19,265.28
TRANSPORT STOP [DMETRO]
DISTANCE FROM THE NEAREST PUBLIC GREEN 35,988.44
SPACE [DSV]
DISTANCE FROM THE TEVERE RIVER [DTV] 51,186.42

The results, that are obtained by the implementation of the MCA and summerized
in Fig. 4, highlight how the distance from the nearest public green spaces [DSV] and
the maintenance status of the property [CONS] represent the most significant vari-
ables with a maximum incidence of +46.96% and +38.70% respectively recorded
for the comparables C08 and C01. The range values generally retraced are between
4.91% and just under 50. 00% with concern of extrinsic characteristics (ESP, PAP,
DMETRO, DSV, DTM). Otherwise for intrinsic features (PIA, CONS) between 5.15
and 38.70%. They are in line with the evidences emphasized by Carlo Forte (1979)
linked to the suitable acceptance values ranges expressing the incidences of out and
inside positional property characteristics on the co-creation market value processes
in territorial-urban settings, i.e. 35.00–5.00 and 25.00–5.00%. Namely the DSV can
be readable as the accessibility proxy on influencing the market value process by
the potential ecosystem services could be supplied. The access to the nearest green
space can be adopted likely a measuring driver of the benefits provided by the urban
ecosystems.
298 M. R. Guarini et al.

Fig. 4 Incidence of the ineastimabilis variables on the housing price of each residential units
considered

About the C08 it is recognizable the maximum incidence of the variable relating to
the distance from the nearest metropolitan public rail transport station [DMETRO],
with an incidence equal to +34.36%. For the comparable C03, on the other hand, the
maximum incidence occurs in correspondence with the variable relating to exposure
[ESP] with +30.89%, and the ones relating to the proximity of the Tevere river [DTV]
registering a percentage value of 34.41%. The variables that are less influential on the
housing prices of the property sample examined are those that express the floor [PIA]
and the difficulty in finding parking [PAP] respectively with an average incidence
compared to the sample study considered by +15.54% and +12.48%. In particular,
the parking difficulty appears to have a low incidence with respect to the other
variables, probably since being a rather widespread problem in the area, it does not
have a significant value on the structuring of the housing price. Table 6 shows the
maximum incidence of each of the inaestimabilis variables selected.

Table 6 Maximum incidence

Inaestimabilis variables Max incidence (%)
of each of the
inaestimabilis variables [PIA] 21.28
selected [DSV] 38.70
[DMETRO] 30.89
[ESP] 18.51
[DTV] 34.36
[CONS] 46.96
[PAP] 34.41
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 299

5 Conclusion

The initiatives of the European Commission aimed at safeguarding the natural capital
and, more properly, the scarce natural resources deteriorated over time due to the
uncontrolled technological and industrial progress, are placed peremptorily towards
public and private entities. In fact, the preparation of urban planning strategies to make
up for the lack of green spaces in the most densely populated areas is important, as
well as necessary. In particular, among the ecosystem services that natural elements
have in favor of cities, the increase in the market value of urban properties can
represent one of the main aspects that public and private subjects must take into
account in the decision-making processes concerning interventions sustainable urban
transformation [25, 36].
The research is linked to the issue outlined. Sin particular, aim of the work has
been to determine the incidence of the natural component on the housing prices.
With reference to a study sample of apartments located in a municipal trade are of
the city of Rome (Italy), the MCA has been implemented. In this way, it has been
possible to detect, among the inaestimabilis variables selected for the case study
as the most influential in the property price formation phenomena, the marginal
contribution of each of them on the housing prices. The methodology implemented
made it possible to systematically analyze and quantify the contribution, in monetary
terms, made by the variables of the natural component to the property values of the
area under investigation. The methodological approach adopted is deductive and,
due to its simplicity of use, is well suited to be adopted by evaluators. In addition,
the high level of consistency between the results obtained and the findings of local
real estate market operators, highlights the validity of the methodology. This study
represents a contribution in the field of evaluation methodology which considers the
green elements not negligible extrinsic characteristics. The importance of including
the green elements surrounding buildings in the property valuation can in turn be a
stimulus for the improvement of the built environment and the achievement of the
Sustainable Development Goals set by the Agenda 2030.
Future developments of the research may concern the analysis of a wider set of
variables pertaining to the natural component, including (i) the quality level of the
area, in terms of CO2 concentration, measured in correspondence with the individual
properties of the sample, and (ii) the level of noise pollution detected near the green
areas and buildings under analysis. Since both are ecosystem services provided by
natural elements in the cities, the research will firstly analyze the correlation between
these variables and housing prices, with the ultimate aim of identifying the most
influential variables in the mechanisms of formation of property prices of the area
considered. All these things eventually applying the Hedonic Price method as alter-
native suitable method to estimate the incidences of interesting variables within the
market value co-creation processes.
Author Contribution M.R.G., P.M., F.S., D.A. have conceived, structured and written the article
together, as well as they have deepened review and editing the proposed article. In particular, have
made the: Conceptualization, M.R.G. and F.S.; data curation, F.S., and D.A.; formal analysis, M.R.G.
300 M. R. Guarini et al.

and F.S.; investigation, M.R.G., F.S. and D.A.; methodology, M.R.G and F.S.; resources, F.S. and
D.A. supervision, M.R.G. and P.M.; validation, M.R.G., P.M. and F.S.; visualization, M.R.G., F.S.
and D.A.; writing—original draft, M.R.G., F.S. and D.A; writing—review and editing, M.R.G., F.S.
and D.A.. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References

1. Aluko O (2011) The effects of location and neighbourhood attributes on housing values in
metropolitan Lagos. Ethiop J Environ Stud Manage 4(2):69–82
2. Guarini MR, Morano P, Sica F (2020) Eco-system services and integrated urban planning.
A multi-criteria assessment framework for ecosystem urban forestry projects. Green Energy
Technol 201–216
3. Guarini MR, Nesticò A, Morano P, Sica F (2019) A multicriteria economic analysis model for
urban forestry projects. Smart Innov Syst Technol 100:564–571
4. Baró F, Chaparro L, Gómez-Baggethun E, Langemeyer J, Nowak DJ, Terradas J (2014) Contri-
bution of ecosystem services to air quality and climate change mitigation policies: the case of
urban forests in Barcelona, Spain. Ambio 43(4):466–479
5. Baró F, Palomo I, Zulian G, Vizcaino P, Haase D, Gómez-Baggethun E (2016) Mapping
ecosystem service capacity, flow and demand for landscape and urban planning a case study
in the Barcelona metropolitan region. Land Use Policy 57:405–417
6. Bartoli F (2006) Tecniche e strumenti per l’analisi economica-finanziaria. Franco Angeli,
Milano
7. Bateman IJ, Mace GM, Fezzi C, Atkinson G, Turner RK (2014) Economic analysis for
ecosystem service assessments. In: Valuing ecosystem services. Edward Elgar Publishing
8. Bateman IJ, Day B, Lake I, Lovett AA (2001) The effect of road traffic on residential property
values: a literature review and hedonic pricing study. Scottish Office and the Stationary Office,
Edinburgh
9. Bencardino M, Nesticò A (2017) Urban sprawl, labor incomes and real estate values. In:
International conference on computational science and its applications. Springer, Cham, pp
17–30
10. Bencardino M, Granata MF, Nesticò A, Salvati L (2016) Urban growth and real estate income.
a comparison of analytical models. In: International conference on computational science and
its applications. Springer, Cham, pp 151–166
11. Benson ED, Hansen JL, Schwartz AL Jr, Smersh GT (1998) Pricing residential amenities: the
value of a view. J Real Estate Financ Econ 16:55–73
12. Bolitzer B, Netusil NR (2000) The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland,
Oregon. J Environ Manage 59:185–193
13. Camagni R (2009) Per un concetto di capitale territoriale. In: Borri D, Ferlaino F (eds) Crescita
e sviluppo regionale: strumenti, sistemi ed azioni. Franco Angeli, Milano
14. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press
15. De Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RM (2002) A typology for the classification, description
and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol Econ 41(3):393–408
16. Debrezion G, Pels E, Rietveld P (2007) The impact of railway stations on residential and
commercial property value: a meta-analysis. J Real Estate Financ Econ 35:161–180
17. Endreny T, Sica F, Nowak D (2020) Tree cover is unevenly distributed across cities globally,
with lowest levels near highway pollution sources. Front Sustain Cities 2:16
18. European Commission (2013) Green infrastructure (GI)—enhancing Europe’s natural capital
19. European Environment Agency (2011) The concept of green infrastructure and its integration
into policies using monitoring systems. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxemburg
20. Ferlan N, Bastic M, Psunder I (2017) Influential factors on the market value of residential
properties. Eng Econ 28(2):135–144
An Application of the Market Comparison Approach for Assessing … 301

21. Guarini MR, Morano P, Sica F (2019) Integrated ecosystem design: an evaluation model to
support the choice of eco-compatible technological solutions for residential building. Energies
12(14):2659
22. Glaeser E (2008) Cities, agglomeration and spatial equilibrium. Oxford University Press, New
York
23. Glaeser E, Kahn M, Rappaport J (2008) Why do the poor live in cities? The role of public
transportation. J Urban Econ 63(1):1–24
24. Graaskamp JA (1977) The appraisal Of25N. Pinckney: a demonstration case for contemporary
appraisal methods. Landmark Research Incorporated, pp 71–77
25. Guarini MR, Morano P, Micheli A, Sica F (2021) Public-private negotiation of the increase in
land or property value by urban variant: an analytical approach tested on a case of real estate
development. Sustainability 13(19):10958
26. Haughton G, Hunter C (2004) Sustainable cities. Routledge
27. Hui EC, Chau CK, Pun L, Law MY (2007) Measuring the neighboring and environ-
mental effects on residential property value: Using spatial weighting matrix. Build Environ
42(6):2333–2343
28. International Valuation Standards Council (2011) International valuation standards. IVSC,
London, UK
29. Jim CY, Chen WY (2009) Value of scenic views: hedonic assessment of private housing in
Hong Kong. Landsc Urban Plan 91:226–234
30. Manganelli B, Tajani F (2014) Optimised management for the development of extraordinary
public properties. J Property Invest Financ
31. Manganelli B, Morano P, Tajani F, Salvo F (2019) Affordability assessment of energy-efficient
building construction in Italy. Sustainability 11(1):249
32. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis.
Island Press, Washington, DC
33. Morano P, Tajani F (2013) The transfer of development rights for the regeneration of brownfield
sites. In: Applied mechanics and materials, vol 409. Trans Tech Publications Ltd, pp 971–978
34. Morano P, Tajani F, Anelli D (2020) A decision support model for investment through the social
impact bonds. The case of the city of Bari (Italy). Valori e Valutazioni (24)
35. Morano P, Tajani F, Anelli D (2021) Urban planning variants: a model for the division of the
activated “plusvalue” between public and private subjects. Valori e Valutazioni (28)
36. Morano P, Tajani F, Guarini MR, Sica F (2021) A systematic review of the existing literature
for the evaluation of sustainable urban projects. Sustainability 13(9):4782
37. Nesticò A, Guarini MR, Morano P, Sica F (2019) An economic analysis algorithm for urban
forestry projects. Sustainability 11(2):314
38. Nichol J, Wong MS (2005) Modeling urban environmental quality in a tropical city. Landsc
Urban Plan 73(1):49–58
39. Norme tecniche di attuazione del comune di Roma. https://www.comune.roma.it/TERRIT
ORIO/nic-gwt/
40. Poudyal NC, Hodges DG, Merrett CD (2006) A hedonic analysis of the demand for and benefits
of urban recreation parks. Land Use Policy 26:975–983
41. Powe NA, Garrod GD, Willis KG (1995) Valuation of urban amenities using an hedonic price
model. J Prop Res 12(2):137–147
42. Saaty T (2008) Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making: why pair-
wise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors—
the analytic hierarchy/network process, RACSAM-Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias
Exactas. Fisicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matematicas 102(2):251–318
43. Schaerer C, Baranzini B, Ramirez JV, Thalmann P (2007) Using the hedonic approach to value
natural land uses in an urban area: an application to Geneva and Zurich. Économie publique/
Public Economics 20:147–167
44. Shackleton S, Chinyimba A, Hebinck P, Shackleton C, Kaoma H (2015) Multiple benefits and
values of trees in urban landscapes in two towns in northern South Africa. Landsc Urban Plan
136:76–86
302 M. R. Guarini et al.

45. Simonotti M (2003) L’analisi estimativa standard dei dati immobiliari. Genio Rurale 10:26–35
46. Troy A, Grove JM (2008) Property values, parks, and crime: a hedonic analysis in Baltimore.
Landsc Urban Plan 87:233–245
47. Tyrväinen L, Pauleit S, Seeland K, de Vries S (2005) Benefits and uses of urban forests and
trees. Urban forests and trees. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
48. Wu C, Ye X, Du Q, Luo P (2017) Spatial effects of accessibility to parks on housing prices in
Shenzhen, China. Habitat Int 63:45–54
49. Wu JJ, Adams RM, Plantinga AJ (2004) Amenities in an urban equilibrium model: residential
development in Portland, Oregon. Land Econ 80(1):19–32
Valuation Between Rules and Creativity
Is It Worth Investing in Green Real
Estate? Empirical Evidence in the Office
Sector of Milan

Alessia Mangialardo and Ezio Micelli

Abstract Pursuing sustainable development of the built environment is now at the

center of the international agenda. The challenge to transform real estate invest-
ments from innovation to established practices, on the one hand, has to balance the
need for adequate revenues and, on the other hand, to ensure affordable costs for
users. In particular, investors often consider the costs of green investments to be
too high compared to expected returns. The goal of this paper is to verify whether
there is a significant differential in performance such as to make the green building
interventions more profitable than traditional ones. Through the comparison of two
financial models it was possible to argue that green development interventions have
significantly higher rates of return compared to traditional development operations.

Keywords Urban regeneration · Building retrofit · Real estate investments ·

Sustainable urban planning · Upcycle

1 Introduction

Pursuing sustainable development of the built environment is now at the center of the
international agenda. In literature, sustainability in the built environment is recog-
nized in three fundamental dimensions: ecological-environmental, socio-cultural and
economic-financial.
In the real estate sector, the “green” characteristics of buildings—linked to the
use of innovative energy performing technologies—represents the starting point to
guarantee multidimensional sustainability. In particular, in parallel with ecological-
environmental issues, sustainable development aims to address economic-financial
and socio-cultural issues with the same attention.

A. Mangialardo (B) · E. Micelli (B)

Department of Architecture and Arts, Università IUAV Di Venezia, Venice, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
E. Micelli
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 305
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_21
306 A. Mangialardo and E. Micelli

Sustainable development of the built environment is mainly driven by the demand

side: when direct consumers consider products obsolete, manufacturers and devel-
opers must innovate their business models to give new value. Nevertheless, investors
often consider the costs of green building too high compared to expected returns.
In the literature the topic is often addressed with reference to the optimization of
production cycles in which not only technologies but also production organizations
and required skills change. In other words, the innovation of production systems in
the construction sector can make more accessible and profitable interventions related
to green building for those actors who are not able or willing to cover the cost of
sustainable technologies despite their significant environmental and social benefits.
The objective of this paper is to verify, through the comparison of two investment
projects that differ in their level of sustainability, although the costs of construction/
renovation are higher, if there is a significant difference in return such as to make the
green building interventions more convenient than traditional ones.
The research is the continuation of a previous study conducted by the authors in
collaboration with the multinational real-estate CBRE that provided the dataset [28].
In particular, the survey analyzes some experiences of properties recently built or
renovated for tertiary use located in Milan, that now is the most important cities in
Italy where the largest real estate investments are concentrated.
The paper is divided into three sections. The first introduces the theme of the
importance of sustainability in buildings. The second illustrates the dataset consid-
ered. The third proposes an interpretation of the results achieved. Finally, the fifth
part summarizes the results of the survey and outlines future developments of the
research.

2 Innovation and Sustainability in Real Estate

Sustainability in the real estate sector is strongly debated by scholars, politicians and
academics and can be summarized in three areas of research: environment, society
and economy. From the economic-financial point of view, the research focuses on the
investigation of possible premium prices of green building [28], on the convenience of
using new technologies of mass customization [19, 29, 30, 39], on savings and costs
of building management [3], on the possible financial self-sufficiency of interventions
[10], on the possibilities of investment in the green sector [42] and on the economic
evaluation of the benefits that green interventions generate [7, 12].
In the construction sector, sustainability and innovation are two closely related
issues. In order to respond to the Sustainable Development Goals of the United
Nations Agenda 2030, it is necessary to experiment with the use of technological
innovations that at the same time generate added value at an affordable cost. Never-
theless, innovation in the construction sector always involves taking certain risks [9].
The challenge to transform sustainable construction interventions from innovation
to established practices is on the one hand to balance the need to make operations
Is It Worth Investing in Green Real Estate? Empirical Evidence … 307

profitable for investors and developers and on the other hand to ensure affordable
costs for users [4, 14, 24, 36, 38].
In the literature there are numerous researches that deepen the theme of the
benefits that users obtain from sustainable building and mainly concern indoor
comfort, increased well-being and healthiness of spaces, reduction of operating costs,
greater aesthetic appeal of buildings and, for the workplace, an increase in employee
productivity together with a lower propensity to get sick [1, 7, 10, 11, 18, 25].
For investors, who aim to increase profitability with respect to alternative asset
classes, purposes are different. Developers are not interested in pursuing sustainable
innovative building processes without a premium price [17, 35]. In the literature the
topic is mainly addressed in the economic and financial field [37, 41]. A first aspect is
related to the analysis of potential returns that can be achieved through an ethical and
responsible approach to the environment and society [11, 22]. Secondly, numerous
studies analyze the investment choices of companies and multinationals that seem
to be particularly sensitive to sustainable construction because they contribute to
enhance their reputation towards a greater sense of global responsibility and give
new meaning to places [26, 32].
Buildings with environmental certification aim to overcome this problem by
ensuring a certain level of sustainability of the building internationally recognized
[13, 17, 31]. Numerous empirical studies analyze and evaluate the considerable level
of economic appreciation of certified buildings [6, 16, 21, 23, 28, 32, 40]. Never-
theless, the premium prices that emerged from the research define a rather hetero-
geneous range of values. This is mainly due to the different quality of the datasets
considered and the different levels of certification. To date, even if there is not yet
a single certification protocol identified globally, the officially recognized protocols
are numerous.
The types of certification essentially depend on the use of the properties and their
location. For example, in the USA, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) certification is most commonly used, while in Japan there is the Compre-
hensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency. Furthermore, in
Australia the Green Star System is used while in Italy different types of protocols
are adopted on the basis of different uses. For residential construction is strongly
used the ClimateHouse certification, for social housing projects is used the protocol
for Transparency, Updating and Certification of Procurement (ITACA) while for
tertiary construction are more used the LEEED certification and the English Building
Research Establishment Environmental Assessment (BREEAM).
308 A. Mangialardo and E. Micelli

3 The Characteristics of the Sample: The Offices Market

in Milan

This study represents the second phase of a research that first investigated the
premium prices of green building and that here aims to assess the differential
of construction costs and performance between sustainable and non-sustainable
construction. The research was conducted in collaboration with the Milan office
of the multinational real estate company CBRE, which provided case studies of real
estate transactions actually occurred in recent years in Milan.
The research has analyzed 20 multi-year lease transactions of sky-ground prop-
erties—newly built or recently renovated—non-certified and of properties consid-
ered green exclusively LEED certified. The decision to use only LEED certification
for sustainable properties is purely methodological: there is the certainty that the
sustainability performance has been evaluated according to the same criterion.
LEED certification was conceived in the early 1990s and has now been adopted
in over 164 countries. This certification can be used for cities, neighborhoods and
individual buildings (GBC Council; [33]). A recent study conducted by the authors
[28], investigates the actual presence of a premium price for LEED certified buildings.
The outcome of this research, in line with the results of other empirical studies
conducted at the international level [16, 21, 23, 32], estimates a statistically significant
premium price only for high level certified properties. In particular, the basic levels
of certification (LEED Base and Silver) have not shown significant results while for
LEED Gold certified properties the premium price is over 7% and up to 11% for the
highest levels of certification (LEED Platinum).
The most common descriptive statistics procedures were used to describe the
dataset examined. For each case was examined the location (Central Business
District, Porta Nuova, other locations outside the center), the annual unit rental fee
(Euro/sqm/year), the consistency (expressed in square meters above ground), the
type of intervention (distinguished between new construction or renovation) and the
presence and quality of LEED certification.
Of the 20 buildings considered, the majority (14) are located between Central
Business District and the Porta Nuova district and 6 buildings are located in the urban
semi-periphery. Type of interventions is represented for 74% renovation operations
of the existing building stock while 26% concerns new constructions. The size of
the buildings examined is varied but 54% of the cases are between 5,000 sqm and
25,000 sqm. The average is more or less 10,000 sqm.
The level of sustainability of the assets was measured with the presence/absence
of an environmental certification. In this case, 55% of the cases have a LEED envi-
ronmental certification. On the contrary, 45% of the case studies did not use particular
sustainability criteria. The level of sustainability of the certified properties depends
on the certification score achieved: 6% of the cases examined obtained LEED Silver
certification, 36% were LEED Gold certified and finally 13% of the experiences
reached the highest level of LEED Platinum certification.
Is It Worth Investing in Green Real Estate? Empirical Evidence … 309

The distribution of costs shows a considerable differentiation without any normal

distribution.
The 25% of the cases introduces costs of construction/restructuring comprised
between 1,000 and 1,100 e/sqm while the 30% of the cases attests to costs comprised
between 1,500 and 1,700 e/sqm. The average of the costs is equal to approximately
1,400 e/sqm.

4 Data Analysis: The Cost and Yield Differential in Green

Real Estate Development Operations

Knowing the construction costs and other costs related to real estate development,
it was possible to compare the different profitability of green and non-green invest-
ments. To this end, the methodology used consists of the differential calculation of
the internal rate of return (IRR) resulting from the process of cash flow analysis
(DCF) of two real estate investment projects (Cfr. Table 1).
In both cases, the hypothesized development scenario involves the construction
of a building for tertiary use located in the Milan Porta Nuova district of 10,000 sqm,
which roughly represents the average area of the analyzed dataset. The cash flow
model for the green scenario provides for the construction of a LEED Gold certified
building, as the descriptive statistics show that it is the most used certification. The
time period considered is articulated at quarterly level for a total period of 4.5 years.
Specifically, two years have been assumed for the building intervention and 30 months
for the income of the spaces.
In order to obtain the most objective comparison possible, a cash flow analysis
model has been hypothesized with different constants with respect to the two different
investment projects.
The elements that differ between the two development models—green and non-
green—are represented by the annual rent, the construction costs, the time of
absorption on the market and the cap rate.
The unit rents were derived from recent research conducted by the authors that
analyzes a large dataset of properties—including several included in this sample
examined—on the premium prices of green building [28]. In the model we adopted an
annual unit fees equal to 444 e/sqm/year for the green scenario and 414 e/sqm/year
for the development model of a non-certified property. From the same research have

Table 1 Summary of the variables considered for the two models

Variable Traditional intervention LEED intervention
Construction costs 1.392 e/sqm 1.531 e/sqm
Annual rent 444 e/sqm 414 e/sqm
Cap rate 6.77% 6.27%
Other operational costs The same for the two models
310 A. Mangialardo and E. Micelli

been deduced the different absorption times for certified and non-certified buildings
that show how certified buildings have better absorption times than non-sustainable
buildings. In particular, the stock rented in pre-let is equal to more than half of the
available surface (51.1%) against 12.8% of non-certified buildings. Still, 30 months
after the end of the construction site, the percentage of vacancy is double (14.5 vs.
6.5%) in non-certified properties compared to certified properties [28].
About construction costs, through the best known methods of statistical investi-
gation (the hedonic price process and the most common correlation tests) we tried to
verify if there was a cost differential between green building interventions and those
of the traditional type. From the surveys unlike cost does not seem to be significant.
This is probably due to the lack of sufficient data to perform statistical elaborations
and the absence of relevant information on the type of interventions performed for
each building.
Nevertheless, a cost differential has been prudentially applied for the two models.
Starting from the average construction cost of 1,392 e/sqm. deducted from the
sample examined, a percentage increase deduced from the international literature was
applied. In the study Turner Construction’s 2005 Green Building “Market Barom-
eter” the respondents identified a higher cost for green building of 13%. A further
study by Galuppo and Tu (2010) conducted through interviews with NAIOP and
PREA members found that the majority of respondents attribute a 10% increase to
LEED construction costs (1,531 e/sqm).
Finally, the last element that diverges between the two models analyzed is the cap
rate. In both scenarios the sale of the property was in fact assumed in the last quarter
considered (20th) capitalizing the gross operating income according to two different
cap rate. As argued by the world’s leading valuation companies, the risks arising
from the sale of a green property are significantly lower than those of a property built
without sustainable criteria. In both cases, assuming an equal division between debt
and equity capital, the estimated cap rate for the green property development project
is 1.53% quarterly (6.27% annual) where the return on equity was estimated at about
8.10% and the return on debt at 4.44%. Similarly, for the cap rate referred to the non
certified development project, the return on debt capital is 4.44% and the return on
equity is 9.10% to reach a quarterly cap rate of 1.65% (6.77% annual).
In this regard, the estimate of the exit value, from which sales commissions of 2%
have been deducted, makes it possible to determine the market value of the entire
asset, which is equal, with appropriate rounding, to 54,200,000 Euros for the non-
certified property (5,400 e/sqm) and 63,993,000 for the LEED certified property
(6,300 e/sqm).
From the two cash flow models analyzed it was possible to calculate the internal
rate of return (IRR) of the two types of investment. In summary, the annual IRR
for non-certified properties is 8.23% while that for certified properties is 11.51%. In
summary, the differential estimated on the basis of the two different IRRs is 3.28%
in favor of LEED construction.
Is It Worth Investing in Green Real Estate? Empirical Evidence … 311

5 The Profitability of Green Properties

The survey advanced in the previous paragraphs allows to highlight three aspects in
favor of development interventions according to green principles.
First, even building interventions not performed according to the highest stan-
dards of sustainability also pursue, albeit to a lesser extent, sustainable criteria.
The increase in green buildings in recent years has led sustainable construction to
become a common practice rather than the exception, promoting the economies of
scale necessary to reduce the costs of innovation [7]. Secondly, green interventions
are carried out by selecting more carefully the materials and construction compo-
nents (such as windows, insulating materials or natural plaster) than buildings built
according to traditional practices. On the contrary, the load-bearing structure of the
building, which represents the highest percentage of hard costs, does not normally
have innovative features. As an example, as claimed by CBRE technicians, even the
choice of a light-colored waterproofing sheath can make the difference. At the same
price, compared to dark-colored waterproofing membranes that today are mostly
used, bright colors are able to reflect light and therefore absorb less heat.
The second topic concerns the expected returns for a LEED certified investment
which, according to expert surveys, were higher than those of a non-certified prop-
erty. Also considering different construction costs and cap rate, the yield differential
between the two investment models is more than 3%. The choice to differentiate the
cap rate in favor of green building, although discussed in the literature, is fully in
line with what is claimed by the main real estate operators.
In financial terms, a lower cap rate is justified by a higher quality of the building
intervention, able to ensure better performance over time, retaining its value to a
greater extent than traditional building interventions. A lower risk premium is also
recognized by banks and credit companies which normally finance sustainable real
estate investments at significantly lower interest rates than those used for traditional
development projects.
The third element reflects the first two. Of course, green premiums may reflect
rising construction or renovation costs, i.e. demand responses to changes in supply.
It is now known that the construction sector is increasingly focused on developing
sustainable, environmentally friendly technologies. Manufacturers are innovating
their supply of building elements and components to meet the growing market
demand and decarbonisation directives of the construction sector. Urban policies
also increasingly aim, especially for new construction, to regulate an innovative way
of building that is responsible and sustainable for the environment and society. The
impact that sustainable technologies generate in the construction sector is officially
recognized and the benefits have also been internalized into long-term projected
capitalisation essays.
312 A. Mangialardo and E. Micelli

6 Conclusions

The objective of this paper was to understand if, from the point of view of devel-
opers, investors and real estate owners, the development—new construction and
renovation—of green buildings can be more profitable than traditional operations.
In particular, starting from the results emerged on the analysis of construction costs
and premium prices and absorption times investigated by the authors in a recent study
[28] and through the comparison of two financial models it was possible to argue how
green development interventions have significantly higher rates of return compared
to traditional development operations.
Future research may cover many topics. First, go to test and measure if there is
an increase or decrease in value of traditional buildings located in areas with high
presence of green buildings. Secondly, the research could extend to other smaller
Italian cities, where green building is not yet widespread and where the real estate
market has known a significant downturn [20, 27], to verify if the construction costs
and the differential of performance maintain similar values.

References

1. Altomonte S, Schiavon S (2013) Occupant satisfaction in LEED and non-LEED certified

buildings. Build Environ 68:66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.06.008
2. Audanaert A, De Boeck L, Roelants K (2010) Economic analysis of the profitability of energy—
saving architectural measures for the achievement of the EPBD standard. Energy 35:2965–2971
3. Bienert S, Schuzenhofer C, Leopoldberger G, Bobsin K, Leugtob K, Huttler W, Popescu D,
Mladin EC, Iasi T, Rodica B et al (2011) Integration of energy performance and life-circle
costing into property valuation practice, report summary. Available online: http://immovalue.
e-sieben.at/pdf/immvalue_result_oriented_report.pdf. 13 Nov 2018
4. Bryson JR, Lombardi R (2009) Balancing product and process sustainability against business
profitability: sustainability as a competitive strategy in the property development process. Bus
Strateg Environ 18(2):97–107
5. Cajias M, Geiger P, Bienert S (2012) Green agenda and green performance: empirical evidence
for real estate companies. J Eur Real Estate Res 5(2):135–155
6. Chappell TW, Corps C (2010) High performance green building: what’s it worth? Investi-
gating the market value of high performance green buildings. Cascadia Region Green Building
Council: Seattle, WA, USA
7. Chegut A, Eichholtz P, Kok N (2014) Supply, demand and the value of green buildings. Urban
Stud 51(1):22–43
8. D’Alpaos C, Bragolusi P (2018) Approcci valutativi alla riqualificazione energetica degli
edifici: Stato dell’arte e future sviluppi. Valori e Valutazioni 20:1–15
9. d’Amato M, Kauko T (2012) Sustainability and risk premium estimation in property valuation
and assessment of worth. Build Res Inform 40(2):174–185
10. Eichholz P, Kok N, Quigley J (2009) Why do companies rent green? Real property and corporate
social responsibility, RICS Research, London
11. Eichholz P, Kok N, Quigley J (2010) Doing well by doing good? Green office buildings. Am
Econ Rev 100(5):2492–2509
12. Entrop AG, Brouwers HJH, Reinders AHME (2010) Evaluation of energy performance indi-
cators and financial aspects of energy saving techniques in residential real estate. Energy Build
42:618–629
Is It Worth Investing in Green Real Estate? Empirical Evidence … 313

13. Fedrizzi RS, Morri G, Pavesi AS, Soffietti F, Verani E (2016) Uno strumento per la creazione
di valore nella realizzazione di edifici sostenibili: La certificazione LEED. Territorio Italia
2:37–47. https://doi.org/10.14609/Ti_1_14_3i
14. Foxon TJ, Köhler J, Michie J, Oughton C (2012) Towards a new complexity economics for
sustainability. Camb J Econ 37(1):187–208
15. Fuerst F, McAllister P (2011) Green noise or green value? Measuring the effects of
environmental certification on office values. Real Estate Econ 39(1):45–69
16. Fuerst F, McAllister P (2009) New evidence on the green building rent and price premium. In:
Proceedings of the annual meeting of the American real estate society. Monterey, CA, USA, 3
April
17. Fuerst F, Mcallister P (2008) Pricing sustainability: An empirical investigation of the value
impacts of green building certification. In: Proceedings of the American real estate society
conference, Captiva Island, FL, USA, 10–14 April
18. Gabe J, Rehm M (2014) Do tenants pay energy efficiency rent premiums? J Prop Invest Financ
32:333–351
19. Gastaldi F, Camerin F (2020) Dismissione e valorizzazione delle aree militari: il 2020 come
anno di cambio di rotta? EyesReg 10(5)
20. Giuffrida S, Trovato MR, Strigari A, Napoli G (2021) “Houses for one euro” and the terri-
tory. Some estimation issues for the “geographic debt” reduction. Smart Innov Syst Technol
178:1043–1052
21. Hyland M, Lyons RC, Lyons S (2012) The value of domestic building energy efficiency—
evidence from Ireland. Energy Econ 40:943–952
22. Kaklauskas A, Zavadskas EK, Dargis R, Bardauskiene D (eds) (2015) Sustainable development
of real estate: monograph. Technika, Vilnius
23. Kauko T (2017) Pricing and sustainability of urban real estate. Routledge, Oxon
24. Kauko T (2018) Innovation in urban real estate the role of sustainability. J Prop Manag
37(2):197–214
25. Lorenz D, Trück S, Lützkendorf T (2008) Exploring the relationship between the sustainability
of construction and market value: theoretical basics and initial empirical results from the
residential property sector. Prop Manag 25(2):119–149
26. Matisoff DC, Noonan DS, Mazzolini AM (2014) Performance or market benefits? The case of
LEED certification. Environ Sci Technol 48:2001–2007. https://doi.org/10.1021/es4042447
27. Mangialardo A, Micelli E (2020) Reconstruction or reuse? How real estate values and planning
choices impact urban redevelopment. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(101):4060
28. Mangialardo A, Micelli E, Saccani F (2019) Does sustainability affect real estate market values?
Empirical evidence from office buildings market in Milan (Italy). Sustainability 11(12). https://
doi.org/10.3390/su11010012
29. Mangialardo A, Micelli E (2018a) Rethinking the construction industry under the circular
economy: principles and case studies. In: Bisello A, Vettorato D, Laconte P, Costa S (eds)
Smart and sustainable planning for cities and regions. Springer: Cham, Switzerland
30. Mangialardo A, Micelli E (2018b) Off-site retrofit to regenerate multi-family homes: evidence
from some European experiences. In: Calabrò F, Della Spina L, Bevilacqua C (eds) International
symposium on new metropolitan perspectives. Springer: Cham, Switzerland
31. Mehdizadeh R, Fischer M, Celoza A (2013) LEED and energy efficiency: do owners game the
system? J Sustain Real Estate 5(1):23–34
32. Morri G (2013) Greenbuilding sustainability and market premium in Italy. J Eur Real-Estate
Res 6:303–332
33. Pavesi AS, Verani E (2012) Introduzione Alla Certificazione LEED®: Progetto, Costruzione,
Gestione—Ottimizzazione del Processo Edilizio Secondo i Principi Della Sostenibilità;
Maggioli Editore: Rimini, Italy
34. Pivo G, Fisher JD (2009) Investment returns from responsible property investments: energy
efficient, transit-orientated and urban regeneration office properties in the US from 1998–
2008; Working Paper; Responsible Property Investing Center, Boston College and University
of Arizona Benecki Center for Real Estate Studies, Indian University: Boston, MA, USA
314 A. Mangialardo and E. Micelli

35. Popescu D, Bienert S, Schutzenhofer C, Bozau R (2012) Impact of energy efficiency measures
on the economic value of buildings. Appl Energy 89:454–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ape
nergy.2011.08.015
36. RICS (2012) Supply, demand and the value of green buildings. Available online: https://www.
isurv.com/downloads/download/1492/supply_demand_and_the_value_of_green_buildings_
rics. 13 Nov 2018
37. Robinson S, McAllister P (2015) Heterogeneous price premiums in sustainable real estate? An
investigation of the relation between value and price premiums. Joisre 1:1–20
38. Thompson B (2015) Innovation in property management. J Property Invest Financ 33(5):436–
445
39. Tricarico L (2018) Community energy enterprises in the distributed energy geography. Int J
Sustain Energy Planning Manage 18:81–94
40. Warren-Myers G (2012) The value of sustainability in real estate: a review from a valuation
perspective. J Prop Invest Financ 30:115–144. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635781211206887
41. McGraw Hill Construction (2009) Green building smart report. McGraw Hill, Bedford
42. Warren-Myers G, Reed R (2009) Sustainability: measurement and valuation?—Insight from
Australia and New Zealand. In: Proceedings of the 15th annual pacific rim real estate society
conference, Sydney, Australia, 18–21 Jan
43. Zieba M, Belniak S, Gluszak M (2013) Demand for sustainable Office space in Poland: the
results from a conjoint experiment in Krakow. Prop Manag 31:404–419
Weighting Procedures
and Environmental Sustainability
Assessment: An Experiment Based
on an Urban Regeneration Programme
in Northern Italy

Marta Bottero, Chiara D’Alpaos, and Alessandra Oppio

Abstract Urban projects, plans, and programs are subject to specific valuation
procedures, which have the objective of assessing the sustainability of the proposed
strategies. In this domain, Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA) provides a
wide set of methods for sustainability assessment, by comparing alternative projects
or criteria on heterogeneous measurement scales. A crucial step in the application
of MCDA methodologies to real-world problems concerns the assessment of criteria
relative importance and in turn the degree of preference attaining different alterna-
tives, due to behavioral issues which can affect final results. This paper illustrates
an experimental protocol developed in the context of the evaluation of an urban
regeneration program in Northern Italy. In the experiment, a group of five experts
and stakeholders were asked to weigh a set of multidimensional attributes according
to three different weighting procedures, namely the Analytic Hierarchy Process,
the SWING method, and the SMARTER method. The paper discusses the results
obtained in the set of weights, pointing out differences as well as similarities and
discussing the pros and cons of the three different weighting procedures.

Keywords Multicriteria analysis · Weighting methods · Experts panel · Urban

regeneration · Questionnaire

M. Bottero (B)
Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
C. D’Alpaos
Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, University of Padova, Padova,
Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
A. Oppio
Department of Architecture and Urban Studies, Politecnico Di Milano, Milan, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 315
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_22
316 M. Bottero et al.

1 Introduction

In the context of urban and territorial planning, it is well known that sustainable
development is a multidimensional concept, according to which different elements
and aspects of a project have to be considered, including environmental impacts,
social issues, and economic effects.
To guarantee transparency, legitimacy and accountability of decision-making
processes in the domain of sustainability assessment, specific evaluation tools can
support Decision Makers (DMs) in their choices about territorial transformations.
Among currently available approaches, a major role is played by Multicriteria Deci-
sion Analysis (MCDA). MCDA is an umbrella term, which refers to a wide family
of methods that are used to make a comparative assessment of alternative projects
or heterogeneous measures [17, 25]. These methods allow for several criteria to be
taken into account simultaneously in complex situations and they are designed to
help DMs to integrate different options, which reflect the opinions of the involved
actors, in a prospective or retrospective framework. DMs’ participation in the process
is a cornerstone of MCDA.
MCDA methods have been extensively used in sustainability assessment due to
their potential in managing a variety of information, parameters, and uncertainties and
because they promote dialogue among stakeholders, analysts, and scientists [5–9].
A crucial step in the development of MCDA is related to the phase of weights
elicitation, in which DMs, experts and stakeholders assess the relative importance
of evaluation criteria in the decision-making process [23]. To this purpose, different
protocols and methods exist and their use is strictly connected to the specific MCDA
method implemented in the evaluation procedure.
The present paper aims at investigating the role of different weights elicitation
protocols in the definition of valuation outcomes. In particular, starting from a real
case study related to an urban regeneration program in Italy, the study proposes an
experiment, in which a group of five experts and stakeholders were asked to weigh
a set of multidimensional attributes, representing the DMs’ preferences according
to conflicting points of views in the valuation of alternative scenarios through
three different weighting procedures, namely the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
proposed by Saaty in the Eighties [26], the SWING method [31] and the Simple
Multi-Attribute Rating Technique Exploiting Ranks (SMARTER) method [13, 14,
31]. The paper examines how behavioral issues can adversely affect results, due
to bias in the weights elicitation procedure, outlines differences and similarities in
the obtained set of weights, and discusses the pros and cons of the three different
weighting procedures under investigation.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 illustrates the
methodological background; Sect. 3 presents materials and methods; Sect. 4 provides
and discusses results; finally, Sect. 5 concludes.
Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability Assessment … 317

2 Methodological Background

According to [28], MCDA grounds on two major components, namely judgmental

and analytical. The judgmental component is reliant on subjective preferences held
by the DM, whereas the analytical component involves mathematical procedures,
which can be operated automatically without any input from the DM. Criteria weights
assignment play a major role in multi-criteria modeling as final results largely depend
on weights and aggregating procedures. Tervonen et al. [29] argue that weights
assessment is the most difficult task in the decision-making process due to the limited
availability of substantial information from the DMs on their objectives, weights, and
preemptive preference ordering. In the domain of urban regeneration, DM’s prefer-
ences are often divergent from stakeholders’ preferences. Weights elicitation methods
in MCDA are often cognitively demanding and require considerable precision, time,
and effort [19].
One of the most debated issues in implementing MCDA techniques is related
to the evaluation criteria (or attributes) weights in preference aggregation proce-
dures [1]. Although there has been a long discussion in the literature on elicitation,
there are no generally accepted methods suggested for assessing criteria weights,
as most of these methods have properties, which impact their applicability in prac-
tice [10, 24]. In this respect, participatory identification and prioritization of criteria
in environmental sciences are challenging because they require the integration of
stakeholders’ conflicting values and perspectives [21]. According to [16], in real-life
applications, the DM expresses his/her preferences with respect to valuation criteria
spontaneously, but they often ignore the range of the scale or the procedure used to
encode this scale. Therefore, it might occur that the way the output is exploited is
not coherent with it means [16].
It is commonly agreed in literature that weights elicitation procedures can be
affected to some extent by behavioral and cognitive bias [15]. There are indeed
several methods for transforming experts’ judgments into relative weights. Eckenrode
[11, 12] investigated and compared six different weighting methods (e.g., ranking,
rating, three versions of paired comparisons, and successive comparisons), but did
not find significant differences among the methods he investigated. Although DMs
assign similar weights to criteria via different methods, nonetheless, minor varia-
tions in weight vectors have the potential to cause significant changes in the subse-
quent ranking of alternatives [18]. In addition, [23, 27] showed that weights derived
via different weighting methods were dissimilar. Their results were subsequently
confirmed for different combinations of weighting methods by [3, 4, 22]. Nonethe-
less, the source of differences in weights obtained by implementing different elicita-
tion procedures is still mostly unclear. None of the existing methods is prominently
superior to the others, and the preferred method in real- world applications depends
on: (a) intended use of the scale (ordinal, interval, or ratio measurement scales), (b)
the time required to implement it; (c) DM’s mental attitudes; (d) DM’s understanding
of both the overall problem and criteria definition; (e) DM’s perception of instruc-
tions for criteria weighting. To address this issue and investigate how experts interact
318 M. Bottero et al.

with weighting methods, in this paper we provide a basis for the selection of methods
in urban planning and development by comparing AHP, SMARTER, and SWING
results.

3 Materials and Methods

The present application is grounded on a previous study developed by the authors

with respect to a real-world case study, relative to the evaluation of the urban regen-
eration program of the city of Collegno, located in the metropolitan area of Torino, in
Northern Italy [6, 7]. In detail, different alternative scenarios for the requalification
of the degraded area are considered and evaluated against a set of multidimensional
criteria. Starting from the structuring of the decision problem already developed, the
case offered the opportunity of experimenting with the implementation of different
weights elicitation protocols by a panel of experts with a deep knowledge of the area
and under examination and related investment projects.

3.1 Description of the Alternative Scenarios and Definition

of the Criteria Family

Bottero et al. [6, 7] identified six alternative scenarios, which focused on different
requalification strategies for the site. The alternative projects can be summarized as
follows: (1) cultural district with a new public library and residences for university
students; (2) smart district highly performing from the point of view of technological
facilities; (3) innovative business district; (4) new productive area in which small
economic activities are settled; (5) valorization of the public spaces in the area,
with special attention to innovative shared solution for living and working; (6) green
district with parks and new green infrastructures such as pedestrian and bicycle paths.
A set of multidimensional criteria have been defined to account for the variety of
features, which characterize the problem, including society, environment, services,
mobility, economy, and governance (Table 1).

3.2 Composition of the Experts’ Panel and Weights

Elicitation Procedures

As already mentioned, a group of five experts and stakeholders was involved in

the experiment. The experts, with expertise in Urban Design, Economics, History
of Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Urban Planning, were surveyed via an
Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability Assessment … 319

Table 1 Valuation criteria

Criteria Description u.m
Social C1 public/private areas Ratio between public and private areas No
C2 Co-working areas Areas for workshop, meeting, and training m2
courses
C3 Co-housing Number of residents in new co-housing No
inhabitants buildings
Environment C4 permeable surface/ Ratio between permeable areas and overall No
territorial area territorial area of the program
C5 urban gardens Total area used for community and private m2
urban gardens
C6 waste production Amount of waste produced in a year by the t/y
activities of the program
Services C7 residential areas Areas for residential functions m2
C8 retail areas Areas for commercial functions m2
C9 sport/cultural areas Areas for sport and cultural activities m2
C10 mixité index Index that describes the functional mix of [0–1]
the area
Mobility C11 slow mobility Area of the pedestrian tracks and bicycle m2
lanes
C12 new public parking Number of new public parking lots No
C13 Car sharing/bike Number of car and bike sharing points No
sharing
Economics C14 total economic Estimate of the social benefits delivered by e
value the program
C15 investment cost Total cost of the program e
C16 job creation Number of new jobs created No
Regeneration C17 regeneration Regenerated area No
C18 Via De Amicis Qualitative index showing the level of the [1–5]
regeneration regeneration of Via De Amicis
C19 territorial index Ratio between the maximum buildable No
volume and the territorial area
Source Bottero et al. [6, 7]

individual face-to-face interview and queried to express their preferences for different
alternative projects according to AHP, SWING, and SMARTER methods.
The specific procedures are described in the remaining part of this paragraph and
examples of surveyed questions administered to the panel of experts are provided.
The AHP grounds on the construction of a hierarchical structure, on top of which
there is the decision problem goal, whereas criteria and sub-criteria are placed at
the lower levels. Criteria and sub-criteria relative importance is determined through
pairwise comparisons among elements, according to Saaty’s fundamental scale [26],
which translates semantic judgments into numerical values. Weights are determined
320 M. Bottero et al.

Fig. 1 Example of question surveyed in AHP weights elicitation

Fig. 2 Example of question surveyed in SWING weights elicitation

according to the eigenvalue approach to pairwise comparisons. In Fig. 1 it is provided

an example of an elicitation question based on pairwise comparisons of sub-criteria
with respect to criterion “services”.
SWING weighting explicitly incorporates criteria/attribute levels in elicitation
questions. Starting from a hypothetical worst-case scenario (i.e., all criteria are set to
the worst possible level), DMs identify the most important criterion as the criterion
which, if improved, would best improve the overall scenario. The most important
criterion is assigned 100 points, and then DMs are requested to move the next criterion
from its worst to its best level, by receiving a point score less than 100 [31]. Figure 2
displays an example question submitted to experts based on the SWING method.
The SMARTER method [14] requires DMs to rank criteria in decreasing order of
importance. The weights are subsequently calculated starting from this ranking and
according to Rank Order Centroid (ROC) weights [2]. Figure 3 shows an example
question administered to the panel of experts according to the SMARTER weighting
procedure.

4 Results and Discussion

Once the information about value judgments has been collected by interviewing the
panel of experts, the weights were computed using the three different procedures
previously mentioned. Our findings confirm results by behavioral research literature
[23, 30] according to which different weighting methods give sometimes diverging
Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability Assessment … 321

Fig. 3 Example of question surveyed in SMARTER weights elicitation

results. According to our results, global weights are sensitive to weighting proce-
dures. Figures 4, 5, 6, 7and 8 illustrate in a radar graph global weights provided by
experts according to the three weighting procedures under investigation.
As an example, in Fig. 4, it is shown the radar graph of the sets of weights
assessed by the Landscape Architect: axes represent the 19 criteria and data points
represent the scores obtained via the different weighting procedures. From direct
inspection of Fig. 4, it emerges that the expert was consistent with his preferences
with respect to some criteria, such as “Sport/cultural areas”, “Residential areas”,
and “Total economic value”, whose scores are very similar for any weighting proce-
dure. By contrast, he expressed more inconsistent preferences with respect to other
criteria, such as those relative to the criterion “Requalification” whose scores diverge
consistently depending on the different weighting procedures. Analogous analysis
was performed and the representation was provided for the Urban Designer (Fig. 5),
the Economist (Fig. 6), the Urban Planner (Fig. 7), and the Historian of Architecture
(Fig. 8), respectively. It is worth noting that divergences among the three sets of
weights assessed by the Historian of Architecture are more consistent compared to
the other experts of the panel.
By direct comparison of Figs. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, it can be observed that global
weights variability is relatively small. Nonetheless, their variability varies within
the group of experts. The criterion “Requalification” exhibits the greatest variability
322 M. Bottero et al.

Fig. 4 Weights assessment—global weights provided by the landscape architect

Fig. 5 Weights assessment—global weights provided by the urban designer

Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability Assessment … 323

Fig. 6 Weights assessment—global weights provided by the economist

Fig. 7 Weights assessment—global weights provided by the urban planner

324 M. Bottero et al.

Fig. 8 Weights assessment—global weights provided by the historian of architecture

depending on weighting procedures. In line with expectations and intuitions, vari-

ability due to different weighting procedures is greater for criteria not strictly related
to the interviewees’ field of expertise: experts were in fact more inconsistent in
the evaluation of those criteria not related to their own field of expertise, whereas
they were more rigorous in the evaluation of criteria pertaining to their domain of
research and practice. As an example, by considering the radar graph representing
the weights assessed by the Economist (Fig. 6), we can observe that the variation
between the minimum and maximum value is relatively large for criteria related
to urban aspects, such as “requalification” or “mobility infrastructure”, whereas
the variation is very small with respect to economic criteria, such as for example
“Total economic value”. This consideration is reinforced by the analysis of the Urban
Designer’s radar graph (Fig. 5), according to which the largest variation is related to
both criteria “Investment cost” and “Mixité index”. In terms of weights variability,
it is interesting to notice that the largest variations are reported in the Historian of
Architecture’s radar graph (Fig. 8). This is maybe because this expert is not familiar
with this kind of reasoning: large variations affect the set of his weights, and specif-
ically those criteria which are more technical and do not pertain to the expert’s
field of competence, such as “Public/private areas”, “Co-housing inhabitants” and
“Co-working areas”.
In addition, by comparing results obtained via the AHP and SWING methods, it
can be investigated whether part of the variability can derive from complexity and
discomfort in pairwise comparing a large number of criteria.
Results show that experts are more consistent in assigning weights to criteria
(which are more general) than to sub-criteria with respect to parent nodes. An excep-
tion is represented by the Historian of Architecture (Fig. 8), who is more consistent
Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability Assessment … 325

with the weighting of criteria than of sub-criteria with respect to the parent node.
He assigns a higher preference to sub-criterion “Investment costs” via the AHP,
whereas he expressed higher relative importance to “Total economic value” via the
SWING method. The Landscape Architect appears to be the most consistent among
experts (Fig. 4) in assigning weights to criteria and sub-criteria via the two procedures
(Figs. 5, 6, 7 and 8). In line with results by [18, 20], thanks to follow-up questions
to experts, it emerged that they found the process of making trade-offs much harder
than pairwise comparisons, due to cognitive complexity and discomfort associated
with the assessment of explicit trade-offs.

5 Conclusions

In this paper, we applied three different weighting methods to weight economic, envi-
ronmental and social criteria with respect to an urban regeneration program by inter-
viewing a panel of experts covering different fields of expertise, namely landscape
architecture, urban design, economics, urban planning and history of architecture.
Our findings reveal that, to some extent, weights are sensitive to weighting proce-
dures. Experts assigned similar weights to the nineteen criteria under investigation
by implementing AHP, SWING, and SMARTER elicitation procedures; nonetheless,
minor variations occurred in weight vectors. Despite we recorded minor variations,
these variations may have the potential to cause significant changes in the subse-
quent ranking of alternatives. This indicates that it might be undesirable to rely upon
a single weighting technique, as there might be bias associated with that particular
technique, especially when decision problems are complex and the number of criteria
and sub-criteria is large.
To investigate the rationale for these divergences, we asked experts follow-up
questions. From their responses, it emerged that experts preferred to express criteria
weights using ordinal ranking and the pairwise comparison approach was considered
as helpful in understanding the decision problem, nonetheless it was perceived as
excessively long and difficult because of cognitive efforts in expressing a relevant
number of judgments. Favored weighting methods tip toward ease of use over that of
potential methodological flaws. Especially in real world applications, most MCDA
frameworks present trade-offs between potential methodologic flaws and their ease-
of-use. Direct rating is potentially the simplest set of methods available for estimating
criteria weights, simply performed by asking experts to assign numerical values to
the different criteria, with no trade-offs involved.
As experts expressed their preferences in favor of ranking weighting techniques,
future research will explore different ranking algorithms, which can be applied in
decision aiding. In the context of decision problems specifically related to urban
regeneration, it would be useful to investigate innovative interactive procedures for
weights elicitation paired with intuitive dynamic interface.
326 M. Bottero et al.

References

1. de Almeida AT, Cavalcante CAV, Alencar MH, Ferreira RJP, de Almeida-Filho AT, Garcez TV
(2015) Multicriteria and multiobjective models for risk, reliability and maintenance decision
analysis. Springer Nature: Cham
2. Barron FH, Barrett BE (1996) The efficacy of SMARTER - simple multi-attribute rating
technique extended to ranking. Acta Psychologica 33 93(1–3):23–36
3. Belton VA (1986) Comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute
value function. Eur J Oper Res 26:7–21
4. Borcherding K, Eppel T, Winterfeldt D (1991) Comparison of weighting judgments in
multiattribute utility measurement. Manag Sci 37:1603–1619
5. Bottero M, D’Alpaos C, Marello A (2020) An application of the a’WOT analysis for the
management of cultural heritage assets: the case of the historical farmhouses in the Aglie
castle (Turin). Sustainability 12(3):1071
6. Bottero M, D’Alpaos C, Oppio A (2019) Ranking of adaptive reuse strategies for aban-
doned industrial heritage in vulnerable contexts: a multiple criteria decision aiding approach.
Sustainability 11(3):785
7. Bottero M, Datola G, Monaco R (2019) Fuzzy Cognitive Maps: a dynamic approach for urban
regeneration processes evaluation [Fuzzy Cognitive Maps: un approccio valutativo dinamico
per la valutazione dei processi di rigenerazione urbana]. Valori e Valutazioni 23:77–90
8. Bottero M, D’Alpaos C, Oppio A (2018) Multicriteria evaluation of urban regeneration
processes: an application of PROMETHEE method in northern Italy. Adv Oper Res 927607
9. Cinelli M, Coles SR, Kirwan K (2014) Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision
analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment, Eco Indicators 46:138–148
10. Diaby V, Sanogo V, Moussa KR (2016) ELICIT: An alternative imprecise weight elicitation
technique for use in multi-criteria decision analysis for healthcare. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon
Outcomes Res 16(1):141–147
11. Eckenrode RT (1965a) Weighting multiple criteria. Manag Sci 12(3):180–192
12. Eckenrode RT (1965b) Time efficiency of preference scaling methods. Percept Motor Skills
21(2):507–514
13. Edwards W, Barron FH (1994) Smarts and smarter: improved simple methods for multiattribute
utility measurement. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 60:306–325
14. Edwards W (1977) How to use multiattribute utility measurement for social decision making.
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-7 326–340
15. Ferretti V, Geneletti D (2020) Does the spatial representation affect criteria weights in
environmental decision-making? Insights from a behavioral experiment. Land Use Policy
97:104613
16. Figueira J, Roy B (2002) Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods
with a revised Simos’ procedure. Eur J Oper Res 139(2):317–326
17. Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (eds) (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art
surveys. Springer, Berlin
18. Hajkowicz SA, McDonald GT, Smith PN (2000) An evaluation of multiple objective deci-
sion support weighting techniques in natural resource management. J Environ Plann Manag
43(4):505–518
19. Larsson A, Riabacke M, Danielson M, Ekenberg L (2015) Cardinal and rank ordering of criteria
- Addressing prescription within weight elicitation. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 14(6):1299–
1330
20. Ng CY (2018) Green product design and development using life cycle assessment and ant
colony optimization. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 95(5–8):3101–3109
21. Ocampo-Melgar A, Orr BJ (2016) Participatory criteria selection: finding conflictive positions
in environmental postassessment of land management and restoration actions. Soc Nat Resour
29(1):119–130
22. Olson DL, Moshkovich HM, Schellenberg R, Mechitov AI (1996) Consistency and accuracy
in decision aids: experiments with four multiattribute systems. Decis Sci 26:723–748
Weighting Procedures and Environmental Sustainability Assessment … 327

23. Pöyhönen M, Hämäläinen RP (2001) On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods.

Eur J Oper Res 129(3):569–585
24. Riabacke M, Danielson M, Ekenberg L (2012) State-of-the-art prescriptive criteria weight
elicitation. Adv Decis Sci 276584
25. Roy B, Bouyssou D (1995) Aide multicritére à la décision: méthodes et case. Economica, Paris
26. Saaty T (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation.
McGraw-Hill, New York
27. Schoemaker PJ, Waid CC (1982) An experimental comparison of different approaches to
determining weights in additive value models. Manag Sci 28:182–196
28. Seo F, Sakawa M (1988) Multiple criteria decision analysis in regional planning: concepts,
methods and applications. Kluwer, Boston, MA
29. Tervonen T, Figueira JR, Lahdelma R, Dias JA, Salminen P (2009) A stochastic method for
robustness analysis in sorting problems. Eur J Oper Res 192(1):236–242
30. Weber M, Borcherding K (1993) Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute
decision making. Eur J Oper Res 67:1–12
31. von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W (1986) Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local
Development. Collaborative
Decision-Making Processes
for the Promotion of Resilient
Landscapes

Lucia Della Spina and Claudia Giorno

Abstract The paper presents a multi-methodological, hybrid, and adaptive evalu-

ation approach to support the development of improvement strategies and identify
alternative tourism routes for promoting resilient landscapes. The approach intro-
duces a Multi-Stakeholder Spatial Decision Analysis (M-SSDA), which combines
Multi-Stakeholder Decision Analysis (M-SDA) with GIS processing to facilitate
interaction among the different stakeholders involved in establishing a common
vision. The reliability of the decision-making process is increased by using multiple
techniques. This is achieved through collaboration among local stakeholders,
researchers, experts, private entities, and local government to identify the perceived
values of the landscape. This collaboration aims to identify shared values that
are essential for testing new approaches to resource management and identifying
thematic routes to promote sustainable tourism in the Sila National Park (Italy).

Keywords Cultural landscape · Decision-making process · Social network ·

Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) · Multi-Stakeholder Spatial Decision Analysis
(M-SSDA) · Multi-Stakeholders Decision Analysis (M-SDA)

1 Introduction

Recently, there has been increased attention on impact of globalization and the subse-
quent expansion of global markets on the concept of “territory” and methods to
strengthen local economies from economic, social, and political perspectives. The
challenge is to establish cyclical processes that enhance productivity, restore attrac-
tiveness, and foster employment and progress [20, 21, 33]. A competitive terri-
tory, whether urban or rural, requires strong human, cultural, and social capital. Its
generates demand for goods and services and addresses various needs, related to a

L. Della Spina (B) · C. Giorno

Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, Reggio Calabria, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 329
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_23
330 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

thriving business environment and prosperity for residents. Strategic policies and
effective planning execution play a vital role in enabling the creation of new value
by synergizing tangible and intangible components [15, 31].
Intangible heritage elements are particularly significant local assets that enhance
attractiveness, competitiveness, and overall quality of life. This elements encom-
pass the sensory and emotional qualities of the environment. The perceptual aspect
of the landscape, building on concepts such as UNESCO’s Historic Urban Land-
scape (HUL) [57] and the European Landscape Convention [10], emerges from the
ongoing interplay between tangible and intangible elements. This intricate inter-
action contributes to the multidimensional factor of perceived well-being, which
is anchored in the quality of life that territories exhibit and offer.
On the international and European stages, competent bodies globally advocate
for the enhancement of the Cultural Landscape (CL) in fragile environments. These
environments are often isolated from primary development trends, and marginalized
due to local economic challenges and declining demographics. This enhancement is
perceived as an essential asset for sustainable advancement, as outlined in significant
directives [10, 57]. In such settings, the CL is considered a prototype for a new
developmental paradigm. Its aim is to seamlessly integrate social, economic, and
environmental elements in both space and time [33]. When properly preserved and
valued, the CL can boost economic progress in regions, particularly in areas such
as tourism, real estate markets, and the promotion of creative and cultural industries
[33–35].
The evaluation of the Cultural Landscape requires a multi-methodological
approach, that explores its characteristics objectively and subjectively. This includes
personal evaluations surrounding environment [34]. In the context of sustainable
development for a specific site’s landscape [37, 60, 61], bottom-up approaches and
collaborative decision-making processes are of fundamental importance, aligned
with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [7, 29]. The research aims to create
locally integrated models, following the Cultural Value Model (CVM) approach [54].
These models and direct representations of the regions, involving local communi-
ties in resource management and promoting development centered on the local area
[54, 58].
The paper discusses into a multi-methodological, hybrid, and adaptive evalua-
tive approach. The approach is designed to facilitate the formulation of enhance-
ment strategies that identify alternative tourist routes to foster resilient landscapes.
The paper introduces a Multi-Stakeholder Spatial Decision Analysis (M-SSDA)
that integrates a Multi-Stakeholder Decision Analysis (M-SDA) [19, 23, 28] with a
Geographic Information System (GIS). The aim is to facilitate interaction among the
diverse stakeholders involved towards a mutually shared perspective. The language
used is clear, concise, and objective, with a formal register and precise word choice.
The text adheres to conventional structure and formatting features, including consis-
tent citation and footnote style. The grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct.
No changes in content have been made. The use of multiple techniques improves the
reliability of the decision-making process aimed at identifying the perceived values
of the landscape. This study employed a multi-methodological approach was used
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 331

in the case study of Sila National Park, in Italy. The collaboration between local
stakeholders, researchers, experts, private entities, and local governance in acknowl-
edging shared values is crucial in testing innovative grassroots approaches to enrich
and manage local resources. It also helps to identify new thematic trajectories
that promote the sustainable development of the case study area.
The document is structured as follows: in Sect. 3, discusses the phases of the
multi-methodological approach in connection with its application to the case study
(Sect. 2). Finally, Sect. 4 presents conclusions regarding the methodological approach
employed and potential future developments of the research.

2 The Case Study

The Sila National Park (SNP) is recognized within the UNESCO World Network
for Excellence due to its diverse array of biodiversity and unique geological features
(Fig. 1). The predominantly mountainous region attracts tourists, particularly during
the summer season. The park area also encompasses sparsely populated inte-
rior zones, with efforts to enhance their cultural and environmental heritage as a
countermeasure to depopulation [17].

Fig. 1 The case study of Sila National Park. Latitude 39°22' 34'' N—Longitude 16°35' 31'' E
(authors’ elaborations by https://www.tuttitalia.it/calabria/)
332 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

The Sila National Park (SNP) covers approximately 73,695 hectares, and spans 21
municipalities across the provinces of Cosenza, Catanzaro and Crotone. It is divided
into three distinct zones: Sila Greca (north), Sila Grande (center), and Sila Piccola
(south). The park was officially established in 2002, but its origins date back to 1923,
when discussions began in Italy about safeguarding natural spaces. This culminated in
the establishment of the country’s first national parks. The SNP includes a significant
portion of the land that was previously part of the Calabria National Park, previously
part in 1968.
plateau contains three of the six man-made reservoirs found within its confines.
It is home to an extensive forested area, with around 80% of the plateau covered in
forests, making it the Italian National Park with the highest proportion of forested
area [18]. The forests are mainly composed of beech and the distinct Sila pine (Pinus
nigra laricio). The ridge of Park give rise to numerous valleys where pastoralism
thrives, embracing transhumance practices and enduring pastures. Agriculture is
predominantly centered around the cultivation of the Sila potato (I.G.P.).
During the 26th session held in Jönköping, Sweden, the International Coordi-
nation Council of the MAB Program (Man and the Biosphere Program) granted
approved Sila’s inclusion as the 10th Italian Biosphere Reserve within UNESCO’s
distinguished World Network of Sites of Excellence. The park’s protected region
is currently being considered for inclusion in the global roster of UNESCO Global
Parks.
It is worth nothing Sila National Park covers not only an a vast area of natural
beauty, but also offers a range of culinary experiences and expert knowledge. These
aspects are certainly worth exploring through experiential tourism routes.
Recent studies have used participatory methods to assess the landscape [2, 13,
14, 16, 45, 47, 48]. This study a part of a lager research project conducted by
Della Spina, who leads of the university laboratory ‘LaborEst - Laboratory of
Economic Evaluations and Real Estate Appraisals-Multidimensional Evaluation
Section’ at the ‘Mediterranea’ University of Reggio Calabria, Italy. The research aims
to promote sustainability by fostering collaboration between communities, academia,
private organizations, and regional administrations [20, 23, 28, 54, 58]. Participa-
tory methods such as workshops, seminars, and company consultations are used to
promote a more informed, resilient, and competitive environment.
In the context of the case study, participatory workshops were set up to promote
sustainable tourism in inland Mediterranean regions. These workshops were based on
the model of Living Labs (LLs) [30]. LLs have facilitated the co-design of services,
products, and resource management methods [17, 18, 23, 28, 31]. The aim of of these
workshops was to develop an integrated development model through Public–Private-
Population Partnerships (4P) [30, 51]. LLs function as for open innovation, co-
design of services, products, and resource management strategies [30, 51]. Their
objective is to encourage cutting-edge sustainable tourism that utilises environ-
mental, cultural, social, and economic resources for regional development through
innovative governance [17, 18, 23, 28, 31]. In the pilot area, LLs co-design has
involved operators, associations, and institutions with the aim of enhancing the
competitiveness of tourism in the Mediterranean hinterland, improving skills and
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 333

innovating the tourist offer. The experience of LLs has brought together various
groups, including local producers, agritourism companies, sports organizations, and
social groups, thus strengthening the cultural, economic, and social dimensions of
the network. This has strengthened the cultural, economic, and social dimensions
of the network, facilitating exchange of ideas, mutual understanding, and innova-
tive tourism offers. The participants shared their perspectives on tourism, promoting
openness and integration the network.

3 Method

The study assesses a cooperative decision-making process among a network of stake-

holders in the context of enhancing resilient landscapes and identifying tourist routes.
This aims to aid in devising enhancement strategies and pinpointing tourist routes to
boost resilient landscapes.
The objective is to establish a versatile and responsive method for gathering and
arranging communal expertise to generate shared principles. The bottom-up formu-
lation of personal indicators of the landscape principles attributed by residents and
tourists to the park areas, using a bottom-up approach, can aid in the creation of
site-specific measures and policies.
The evaluation model for the complex subject of the cultural landscape under
examination adopts a multi-method approach. This includes a Multi-Stakeholder
Spatial Decision Analysis (M-SSDA), which combines Multi-Stakeholders Deci-
sion Analysis (M-SDA) [28, 58] with GIS processing. The aim is to promote collab-
oration among different stakeholders for a unified developmental perspective [30].
The park community collaboratively experiments with sustainable approaches to
jointly promote, co-create, and evaluate place-based ideas and solutions [17, 20,
28] for resource enhancement, using deliberative evaluation methods [17, 20, 28].
The Cultural Values Model [54], is used to facilitate a collaborative and interac-
tive learning process that uncovers local resources and common principles from a
comprehensive and integrated perspective. The model takes into account the complex
and specific context, as well as the diverse emotions and perceptions of landscape
places felt by the Park community [15, 20, 31, 33, 54].
The methodological approach consisted of the following core stages:
• Cognitive framework, designed to identify hard data and gather soft data
on landscape perceptions, following the Cultural Values Model [5, 54].
• Processing of soft surveys using Semantic Analysis derived from in-depth
interviews.
• Development of the GIS spatial representation model for hard data, along with the
manipulation of soft data to create maps of landscape value locations as perceived
by interviewees. These maps are used to create new thematic routes for the Park.
• The pathways are assessed by multiple groups and ranked based on objective
criteria that are endorsed by the “Park community”.
334 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

The proposed framework integrates various methods to create a versatile decision

support system that is sensitive to its context. These methods with a holistic approach
to problem-solving [3, 9, 12, 39, 42], where decision challenges are viewed as
cyclical. Incorporating different techniques enables a thorough exploration of the
decision problem from various perspectives. An analysis was conducted on people’s
perceptions of Cultural Landscape Services (CLS) and their links with the local
community was undertaken. The research utilised expert knowledge and common
knowledge [3], viewing considering the landscape as a reflection of collective
memory and cultural environment [1].
A knowledge model focused on shared values was then constructed by incorpo-
rating Hard and Soft Systems Analysis [53]. The multidisciplinary research team
examined each aspect of the landscape within this shared knowledge framework,
assessing landscape attributes using a combination of Hard and Soft data [9].
Spatial indicators included categories such as population, economy, tourism,
transport, infrastructure, soil and subsoil, hydrosphere, landscape, heritage and
services. These indicators were derived from a variety of sources [38, 40].
A concise knowledge framework was developed through collaboration between
experts and stakeholders. The framework, which ranks pain points and potentials
according to relevance and chromatic color scale (Tables 1 and 2).
The framework was integrated through a survey of Cultural Landscape Services
(CLS), elaborated in a GIS environment to develop summary maps. The municipal-
ities were classified by CLS density using a chromatic scale (Fig. 2).
To gain insight into the perceived context and to explore challenges, preferences
and potential solutions, the local community of the park was engaged through Soft
Systems Analysis.
Two different groups of people were selected following the CVM model: insiders
(institutions, professionals, residents) and outsiders (visitors, tourists, researchers).
Working with local stakeholders has provided valuable insights into the perception
of the landscape by outsiders who support the enhancement of the park.
The local stakeholder map helps to identify the values perceived by individ-
uals, facilitating the construction of a network of values and relationships within
the different CLS categories. The soft data collected are used to identify identi-
fication of the values perceived by the local community, which are essential for
determining implementation strategies.
The community’s dominant figures [63] were classified into four groups:
• Promoters: Represent the Institutional authorities in the area and have a significant
influence on decisions in the public interest [63].
• Experts: Researchers with scientific knowledge and academic affiliations who
contribute to decision-making [63].
• Operators: Influential individuals and groups in the hospitality and production
sectors who shape decisions in line with their objectives [63].
• Users: Tourists and local residents are interested but have limited influence on
decision-making. However, their involvement in policymaking is crucial [63].
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 335

Table 1 Criticality (high relevance, media relevance, low relevance)

Criticality
Population Economy Tourism Transport
Demographic Lack of a comprehensive Tourist Insufficient
decline management, enhancement, and seasonality public
Low levels of integration policy for economic Low quality of transportation
education activities the tourist Overreliance on
Ongoing decline in economic offerings private transport
activities, including agriculture and Insufficient Inadequate road
crafts promotion and network coverage
Significant unemployment rate development of High volume of
various tourist tourist buses
attractions Lack of
Inadequate coordination
tourist services and integration
Outdated and among various
obsolete types of
accommodation infrastructure
Superficial or and
ephemeral transportation
tourist Shortage of
experiences parking
Lack of facilities
qualified
personnel
Agriculture Soil, subsoil, and hydrosphere Cultural and Services for the
Abandonment of Presence of areas with high landscape citizen
agricultural hydrogeological risk heritage Lack of social
activities Presence of numerous vacant or Lack of recreational
Poor valorization abandoned houses protection, facilities
of organic management, and Concentration of
products en-hancement events and
policy for the demonstrations
landscape primarily during
resource the summer
Lack of an months
integrated
program of
knowledge and
enhancement of
cultural heritage
Threat to the
conservation of
biodiversity
Bad management
of cultural
heritage
Abandonment of
proto-industrial
buildings (mills,
etc.)
Poor
maintenance of
paths and mule
tracks
336 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

Table 2 Potentiality (high relevance, media relevance, low relevance)

Potentiality
Population Economy Tourism Transport
Tourism: an economic sector UNESCO site of
experiencing continuous growth excellence
Presence of traditional local Centuries-old
economic activities tourist attraction
Presence of
uncontaminated
landscapes and
authentic locations
Annual increase
in arrivals
Availability of
traditional local
products
Presence of
natural-historical
and hiking trails,
among other
attractions
Agriculture Soil, subsoil, and hydrosphere Cultural and Services for the
Presence of typical Forests and vegetation dominate landscape citizen
agricultural most of the territory heritage
products Presence of torrential Presence of
Presence of unused watercourses proto-industrial
agricultural areas Potential to use water resources heritage
for power generation Existence of
significant
biodiversity
ecosystems
Abundance of
Nature Reserves
Presence of
cultural and
religious events
Museum
complex: Mattia
Preti Museum

The LLs and field surveys helped to identify community values related to land-
scape, environment, culture, architecture and services. Stakeholders interested in
landscape heritage were interviewed using the Cultural Values Model [54], This
enriched the survey and helped researchers in landscape studies to understand the
emotional aspects of place experiences [32, 63]. More than 100 interviews were
conducted.
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 337

Fig. 2 Density of Cultural Landscape Services (CLS). a Natural resources: landscape diversity;
nature reserves, protected and urbanized areas; scenic walks; b Historical-Cultural resources: histor-
ical centers; churches and hermitages; folkways; caves and geosites; educational farms; museums;
c Economic resources: accommodation offer; accessibility and mobility; certified farms; certified
crops. a–c Latitude 39°22' 34'' N—Longitude 16°35' 31'' E

The survey identified preferred places and itineraries for tourists who are in
exploring the unique features of a destination. Respondents’ perceptions were anal-
ysed to extract keywords [44, 55], which facilitated the identification of tourist
clusters associated with experiential tourism and preferred places [41, 46].
The tourism experience is shaped by four distinct clusters that contribute to the
overall experience:
– Places/Traditions: Historic centers, heritage, cultural itineraries, food. and tradi-
tional holidays are important to the landscape experience.
– Identity/Community: Culture, hospitality, villages, traditional culture, ancient
crafts, and experiential tourism reflect a sense of identity and community.
– Wellness/Sports: Landscape, culture, adventure, sea and mountain activities,
relaxation, accommodation, traditions, and local cuisine highlight the wellness
and sports aspects.
– Nature/Science education: Parks, nature reserves, natural environments, nature
trails, educational farms and science education emphasize the role of /nature and
science education.
338 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

Fig. 3 Some representations in the GIS environment of itineraries and main areas of interest. a Iden-
tity/Community: culture of places, landscape, hospitality, villages, flavors of local culture, ancient
crafts, experiential tourism; b Nature/Scientific training: parks and nature reserves, unspoiled
nature, nature trails, educational farms. Scientific training. a–b Latitude 39°22' 34'' N—Longitude
16°35' 31'' E

The respondents’ suggested places and routes are summarised in a GIS-based

map [36, 50, 59]. Geo-statistical techniques were employed to identify the areas that
were of greatest interest and importance to the respondents (Fig. 3).
Based on the results of previous analyses, as well as the evaluation of conflicts
and shared values [11, 43, 62], the NAIADE method (Novel Approach to impre-
cise decision-making and evaluation environments) was developed. NAIADE is a
discrete multicriteria method developed by Munda [4, 49], It allows for the evalua-
tion of an alternative’s performance with respect to an evaluation criterion using crisp,
stochastic or fuzzy measures, making it highly flexible for real-world applications.
NAIADE distinguished by its use of conflict analysis techniques that can be integrated
with multi-criteria results. NAIADE provides the following information:
• Classification of alternatives based on the set of evaluation criteria (i.e. technical
compromise alternative).
• Indications of the distance between the positions of different stakeholders (i.e. the
possibility of convergence of interests or the formation of coalitions).
• Classification of alternatives on the basis of impacts or stakeholder preferences
(social compromise alternative).
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 339

From a methodological perspective, NAIADE enables the ranking of different

alternatives/scenarios based on multiple criteria considered simultaneously, while
taking into account the objectives, needs and expected outcomes of all the actors
involved. The entire NAIADE procedure comprises four main phases:
1. Pairwise comparison of alternatives for each criterion.
2. Aggregation of all criteria.
3. Ranking of alternatives.
4. Analysis of the social conflict.
In summary, the development of NAIADE requires the creation of two
different matrices that generate separate rankings for the proposed alternatives. The
first matrix, as expected in any multi-criteria method, is an impact (or evaluation)
matrix, which assigns scores or ratings to each criterion for each performance of
an alternative, as expected in any multi-criteria method. Meanwhile, the second
matrix, known as the fairness matrix (also known as the social matrix or social
impact matrix), which uses exclusively qualitative criteria to highlight the level of
conflict and potential coalitions among different stakeholders in relation among to
each alternative or scenario. It is also referred to as the social matrix or social impact
matrix.
The application of the NAIADE method to the case study yields the satisfaction
level for each group with the sites and itineraries identified and described in the
previous phases. This provides a ranking of the itineraries based on the preferences
of the four stakeholder groups (Fig. 4). The equity analysis, facilitated by the fairness
matrix, offers a linguistic representation of how much each stakeholder group values
each of the alternatives presented by the CLS itineraries. NAIADE also provides
information on the relative distances among itinerary rankings and the potential for
convergence of interests or alliances among different stakeholder groups. This reflects
the cultural and identity ties between the community and the landscape resources
being enhanced.
Figure 5 shown a coalition formation, where decreasing similarity index
values indicate higher conflict levels among social groups.
Finally, conflict indices are calculated for each coalition, represented by values
ranging from 0 to 1 and normalized to the sum. These indices represent the degree of
conflict associated with each category of the CLS itinerary. A higher index indicates
a lower level of consensus on that category.

4 Intermediate Results

After establishing the decision-making context had been established from the stake-
holders’ perspective, the co-evaluation phase revealed the recognition of shared
values and mutual goals. The aim was minimize potential conflicts [11, 43]. The
final evaluation of the alternative thematic paths using the NAIDE method resulted
340 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

Fig. 4 NAIADE method. Equity analysis results

Fig. 5 Scenario simulation for three possible stakeholder coalitions

in final ranking that showed a greater convergence of interests for the Identity and
Community Relations path, followed by the Wellness and Sport path (Fig. 6).
The co-evaluation process identified the main catalysts for the innovative valoriza-
tion and promotion of the park and its various resources through a co-design process
[4, 56].
The results of the co-evaluation process included the following:
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 341

Fig. 6 Alternative thematic itineraries. a Identity and community relations itineraries; b well-
ness and sport itineraries. Latitude 39°22' 34'' N—Longitude 16°35' 31'' E (authors’ elaborations by
https://www.tuttitalia.it/calabria/)

• Use of semantic analysis [42] to process data derived from interviews, focusing
on subjective judgements about favorite places and other perceived aspects of the
park landscape.
• Through frequency analysis, relevant keywords were verified and selected.
• A comparison of keywords from all interviews, lead to the identification of four
distinct semantic fields. These fields correspond to clusters of subjective indicators
that represent the objective identity values of the landscape as shared by the
interviewees, both insiders and outsiders.
• A map that represents the perceived landscape and localizes proposed sites
subjected to Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) [11, 50, 62].
• Areas with a higher density of perceived values, are identified, taking into account
weighting based on the importance given by respondents, the precision of the
description of the place and the proximity of the points.
• The identification of shared values and their local significance is valuable for the
developing of new strategies to promote tourism in the Park and explore alternative
tourist routes.
• The final ranking of the alternative thematic itineraries have been ranked according
to the NAIDE method, with a higher convergence of interest for the Identity and
Community Relations itinerary having the highest convergence of interest (shown
342 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

in Fig. 6a), followed by the Wellness and Sport itinerary (as shown in Fig. 6), the
Culture and Local Traditions itinerary, and the Nature and Science Education
itinerary.

5 Conclusion

The primary outcomes of this experimental study pertain to the examination and iden-
tification of users’ objective perceptions of the landscape, the recognition of values
and meanings linked to with the most attractive places, and their spatial represen-
tation based on a Multi-Stakeholder Analysis. The use of subjective indicators and
structured surveys, following the principles of the Cultural Value Model [54], allows
researchers to build locally integrated models that are tangible and direct expres-
sions of the analyzed territory. The process is multi-methodological and involves
interactive comparisons with the Park community.
The final outcome is a collective analysis based on the community’s perceptions
and desires, as represented by the perceived landscape. This analysis serves as a
tool for knowledge, with a strong emphasis on the uniqueness of resources and on
the recognition of shared values and meanings between shared by both the local
community and landscape users.
In summary, the process of social, interactive, dialogic, and collaborative inno-
vation, including co-planning and co-evaluation [8], aims to promote innovative
approaches to local development. It emphasizes the synergistic relationship and
interaction between the landscape and the community that inhabits and shapes it.
This process recognizes dynamic cultural evolution and adaptive innovation [8, 52].
In this configured process, new landscape services arise from the genuine needs of
people and are identifiable in specific places. They are acknowledged within the land-
scape itineraries, which are intended as pathways for enhancing specific resources,
and expressing of the communities that inhabit and use the park.
Furthermore, by recognising of shared values that represent cultural and identity
connections between communities and places, it is possible to identify strategies
and actions to enhance the landscape of the Park. These strategies can improve
resilience, particularly in fragile contexts, and support the development of local and
collaborative approaches to utilise local resources [8, 24, 25, 52].
The landscape serves as a complex laboratory and a research space for developing
of innovative processes. It enables bottom-up planning interventions on the territory.
By identifying relational values [4, 8, 22, 24–27, 56], shared management models for
resource transformation and management [22, 27] can be developed. These models
have positive effects on the quality of spaces, patterns of use and relationships. They
contribute to strengthening resilience by promoting alternative forms of governance
and resource management. These shared change models facilitate transformations in
line with evolving community needs and aspirations [2, 6, 15, 22, 24, 63].
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 343

Author Contributions The authors jointly conceived and developed the approach and decided on
the overall objective and structure of the paper, which must be attributed in equal parts: Conceptu-
alization, L.D.S.; methodology, L.D.S.; software, C.G.; validation, L.D.S;. formal analysis, L.D.S.
and C.G.; investigation, C.G.; resources, L.D.S.; data curation, C.G.; writing original draft prepara-
tion, L.D.S. and C.G.; writing review and editing, L.D.S. and C.G.; visualization, L.D.S. and C.G.;
supervision, L.D.S.; project administration, L.D.S.; funding acquisition, L.D.S.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References

1. Ackoff RL (2010) Systems thinking for curious managers. Triarchy Press

2. Adekola O, Mitchell G (2011) The Niger Delta Wetlands: threats to ecosystem services, their
importance to dependent communities and possible management measures. Int J Biodivers Sci
Ecosyst Serv & Manag 7:50–68
3. Bánáthy BH (2000) Guided evolution of society: a systems view (contemporary systems
thinking). Springer, Berlin
4. Bocanet A, Ponsiglione C (2012) Balancing exploration and exploitation in complex environ-
ments. Vine 42:15–35
5. Calabrò F, Della Spina L (2020) Il patrimonio culturale come driver di sviluppo economico
per territori ‘fragili e vulnerabili’, LaborEst, n. 21/2020 - ISSN online 2421-3187
6. Campolo D (2016) L’uso sostenibile delle aree interne attraverso il paesaggio culturale e le
cultural routes. LaborEst n. 12/2016. https://doi.org/10.19254/LaborEst.12.13, ISSN online
2421-3187
7. Cassatella C, Peano A (2011) Landscape indicators: assessing and monitoring landscape
quality. Springer
8. Cerreta M, Panaro S (2017) From perceived values to shared values: a multi-stakeholder spatial
decision analysis (M-SSDA) for resilient landscapes. Sustainability 9(7):1113
9. Checkland P, Poulter J (2006) Learning for action. Wiley, Chichester, UK
10. Convenzione Europea sul Paesaggio (2000). http://www.convenzioneeuropeapaesaggio.benicu
lturali.it. Accessed 13 Mar 2021
11. Cressie NAC, Wikle CK (2011) Statistics for spatio-temporal data. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA
12. D’Auria A (2009) Urban and rural areas: creative strategies to compete. Sustain City Creat:
Promot Creat Urban Initiat BDC 9:771–783
13. Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd JW, Chan KMA, Costanza R, Elmqvist T,
Flint CG, Gobster PH, Gret-Regamey A, Rebecca L, Muhar S, Penker M, Ribe RG, Schaup-
penleher T, Sikor T, Soloviy I, Spiernburg M, Taczanowska K, Tam J, von der Dunk A (2012)
Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. PNAS 109(23):8812–8819
14. Daw T, Brown K, Rosendo S, Pomeroy R (2011) Applying the ecosystem services concept to
poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being. Environ Conserv 38:370–379
15. De Groot R, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the
concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision-
making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272
16. De Groot R, Ramakrishnan, PS, Berg AVD, Kulenthran T, Muller S, Pitt D, Wascher D (2005)
Cultural and amenity services. In: Findings of the condition and trends working group of the
millennium ecosystem assessment, ecosystems and human well- being: current state and trends.
Millennium ecosystem assessment series, vol 1. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp 455–476
17. Della Spina L (2017) Integrated evaluation and multi-methodological approaches for the
enhancement of the cultural landscape. In: Gervasi O et al (eds) Computational science and
its applications – ICCSA 2017. ICCSA 2017. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 10404.
Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62392-4_35
344 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

18. Della Spina L (2018) The integrated evaluation as a driving tool for cultural-heritage enhance-
ment strategies. In: Bisello A. et al (eds) Smart and sustainable planning for cities and regions.
Results of SSPCR 2017. Green energy and technology. Springer, pp 1–11. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-319-75774-2_40, ISSN: 1865-3537
19. Della Spina L (2019) Multidimensional assessment for culture-led and community-driven urban
regeneration as driver for trigger economic vitality in urban historic centers. Sustainability,
7237, vol. 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247237
20. Della Spina L (2019) Scenarios for a sustainable valorisation of cultural landscape as driver
of local development. In: Calabrò F, Della Spina L, Bevilacqua C (eds) New metropolitan
perspectives. ISHT 2018. Smart innovation, systems and technologies, vol 100. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92099-3_14
21. Della Spina L (2020) Revitalization of inland and marginal areas: a multi-criteria decision
aid approach for shared development strategies. Valori e Valutazioni 25. https://siev.org/6-25-
2020/
22. Della Spina L (2021) Strategic planning and decision making: a case study for the integrated
management of cultural heritage assets in Southern Italy. In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della
Spina L (eds) New metropolitan perspectives. NMP 2020. Smart innovation, systems and
technologies, vol 178. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48279-4_104
23. Della Spina L, Giorno C (2021) Cultural Landscapes: a multi-stakeholder methodological
approach to support widespread and shared tourism development strategies. Sustainability
13:7175. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137175
24. Della Spina L, Giorno C (2022) Waste landscape: urban regeneration process for shared
scenarios. Sustainability 14(5):2880. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052880
25. Della Spina L, Giorno C, Galati Casmiro R (2019) Bottom-up processes for culture-led urban
regeneration scenarios. In: Misra S. et al. (eds) Computational Science and Its Applications –
ICCSA 2019. ICCSA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11622. Springer, Cham.
In: Misra et al. (Eds.): ICCSA 2019, LNCS 11622, pp. 93–107, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-030-24305-0_8
26. Della Spina L, Giorno C, Galati Casmiro R (2020) An integrated decision support system to
define the best scenario for the adaptive sustainable re-use of cultural heritage in Southern Italy.
In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della Spina L (eds) New metropolitan perspectives. NMP 2020.
Smart innovation, systems and technologies, vol 177. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-030-52869-0_22
27. Della Spina L, Rugolo A (2021) A multicriteria decision aid process for urban regeneration
process of abandoned industrial areas. In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della Spina L (eds) New
metropolitan perspectives. NMP 2020. Smart innovation, systems and technologies, vol 178.
Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48279-4_99
28. Della Spina L, Viglianisi A (2021) Hybrid evaluation approaches for cultural landscape: the
case of “Riviera dei Gelsomini” area in Italy. In: Bevilacqua C, Calabrò F, Della Spina L (eds)
New metropolitan perspectives. NMP 2020. Smart innovation, systems and technologies, vol
178. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48279-4_12
29. Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) (2016) The sustainable development goals
report 2016; UN: New York, NY, USA. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/the%20sustain
able%20development%20goals%20report%202016.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2017
30. European Commission Information Society and Media (2009) Living labs for user-driven open
innovation; an overview of the living labs methodology, activities, and achievements. Unit F4
New Infrastructure Paradigms and Experimental Facilities; Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities: Luxembourg
31. Fagerholm N, Käyhkö N, Ndumbaro F, Khamis M (2012) Community stakeholders’ knowledge
in landscape assessment – mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecol Indic 18:421–433
32. Funtowicz SO, Martinez-Alier J, Munda G, Ravetz J (2002) Multicriteria-based environmental
policy. In: Abaza H, Baranzini A (eds) Implementing sustainable development. UNEP/Edward
Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 53–77
Cultural Landscapes as a Driver of Local Development. Collaborative … 345

33. Fusco Girard L (2014) The role of cultural urban landscape towards a new urban economics:
new structural assets for increasing economic productivity through hybrid processes. Hous
Policies Urban Econ 1:3–27
34. Fusco Girard L (2011) Multidimensional evaluation processes to manage creative, resilient and
sustainable city. Aestimum 59:123–139
35. Girardet H (2010) Regenerative cities. World Future Council and HafenCity University,
Hamburg
36. Goddard C (2011) Semantic analysis: a practical introduction. Oxford University Press, USA
37. Goosen M, Langers F (2000) Assessing quality of rural areas in the Netherlands: finding the
most important indicators for recreation. Landsc Urban Plan 46(4):241–251
38. http://dati.istat.it/Inde. Accessed 30 Sept 2020
39. http://www.edinat.it/pdf/Parco%20Nazionale%20della%20Sila.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept 2020
40. https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/it. Accessed 30 Sept 2020
41. Irvine K, O’Brien L, Ravenscroft N, Cooper N, Everard M, Fazey I, Reed M, Kenter JO (2016)
Ecosystem services and the idea of shared values. Ecosyst Serv 21:184–193
42. Jackson M (2003) Systems thinking: creating holisms for managers. Wiley, Chichester, UK
43. Kashyap V, Sivadas E (2012) An exploratory examination of shared values in channel
relationships. J Bus Res 65:586–593
44. Kaymaz IC (2012) Landscape perception. Landsc Plan 251–276
45. Kenter JO, Hyde T, Christie M, Fazey I (2011) The importance of deliberation in valuing
ecosystem services in developing countries—evidence from the Solomon Islands. Glob Environ
Chang 21:505–521
46. Kenter JO, Reed MS, Irvine KN, O’Brien L, Brady E, Bryce R, Watson V (2014) Shared, plural
and cultural values of ecosystems. UK national ecosystem assessment follow-on work package
report 6
47. Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E, Lomas PL, Montes C (2009) Effects of spatial and
temporal scales on cultural services valuation. J Environ Manag 90:1050–1059
48. Milcu A, Hanspach J, Abson D, Fischer J (2013) Cultural ecosystem services: a literature
review and prospects for future research. Ecol Soc 18(3):44
49. Munda G (1995) Multicriteria evaluation in a fuzzy environment. Theory and applications in
ecological economics. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, The Netherlands
50. Murgante B, Danese M (2011) Urban versus rural: the decrease of agricultural areas and
the development of urban zones analyzed with spatial statistics. Int J Agric Environ Inf Syst
(IJAEIS) 2:16–28
51. Ostrom E (2006) Governare i Beni Collettivi. Marsilio, Venezia, Italy
52. Sacco PL, Zamagni S (2006) Teoria Economica e Relazioni Interpersonali. Il Mulino: Bologna,
Italy
53. Smith J (2013) Cultural landscape theory and practice. Moving from observation to experience.
In: Albert MT, Bernecker R, Rudolff B (eds) Understanding heritage. Perspectives in heritage
studies. Heritage studies, vol 1. Gruyter GmbH, Berlin, Germany, pp. 49–66
54. Stephenson J (2008) The cultural values model: an integrated approach to values in landscapes.
Landsc Urban Plan 84:127–139. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S01692046
07001661. Accessed 30 Sept 2020
55. Sutton RK (2013) Ecology of scale in visual landscape assessments. In: Landscape architecture
program: faculty scholarly and creative activity; University of Nebraska-Lincoln: Lincolin, NE,
USA, p 17
56. Trovato MR, Micalizzi P, Giuffrida S (2021) Assessment of landscape co-benefits in Natura
2000 site management plans. Sustainability 13(10):5707. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105707
57. UNESCO (2011) Historic urban landscape recommendations. Paris
58. UNU-IAS, Bioversity International, IGES; UNDP (2014) Toolkit for the indicators of resilience
in Socio-Ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes (SEPLS). https://comdeksproject.
files.wordpress.com/2014/11/toolkit-indicators-web.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2017
59. Van den Brink A, Bruns D, Tobi H, Bell S (2017) Research in landscape architecture: methods
and methodology. Routledge, New York, NY, USA
346 L. Della Spina and C. Giorno

60. 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. Landsc Urban Plan 65(1–2):5–18
61. Veenhoven R (2007) Subjective measures of well-being. Human well-being: concept and
measurement. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp 214–239
62. Vizzari M (2011) Spatial modelling of potential landscape quality. Appl Geogr 31:108–118
63. Wilson K, Morren GEB Jr (1990) Systems approaches for improvement in agriculture and
resource management. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse
and Sustainable Redevelopment
Scenarios: Including Local
Communities’ Multiple Values
in the Decision-Making Process

Cristina Coscia , Giulia Lazzari, and Irene Rubino

Abstract Abandoned 19th and 20th century industrial buildings represent a partic-
ularly vulnerable form of Cultural Heritage and current evidence shows that their
preservation is frequently at risk. Overall, the implementation of adaptive reuse
interventions is generally recommended as a sustainable strategy to conserve these
buildings, make them meaningful for the present society and eventually enable
their transmission to future generations. However, the lack of awareness about the
multiple values of Industrial Heritage (IH), the scarcity of economic resources and
the presence of competing interests of different stakeholders—e.g. owners, local
government, bodies for the protection of Cultural Heritage, potential investors, resi-
dents, etc.—make the decision-making process about the future of IH far from being
straightforward. Capitalizing on the case of a recently abandoned industrial area
located on the Ligurian coast (Italy), this piece of research aims to highlight that
investigating the points of view of relevant communities (e.g. about the intangible
values attributed to IH, perceived socio-economic needs, etc.) at an early stage of
the decision-making process can contribute to reduce social conflicts and favor the
development of projects able to combine the fulfillment of socio-economic objec-
tives with the preservation of the local identity and memory. Then, as a preliminary
step towards the adoption of a holistic approach, the paper explores communities’
willingness to pay for favorite redevelopment scenarios, to elicit the intangible values
associated by different subjects to IH. Finally, it advances that evaluation frameworks
to be adopted in the future should be able to consider the principles of civil economy
and intergenerational equity.

C. Coscia · G. Lazzari · I. Rubino (B)

Department of Architecture and Design, Polytechnic of Turin, Turin, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
C. Coscia
e-mail: [email protected]
G. Lazzari
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 347
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_24
348 C. Coscia et al.

Keywords Industrial heritage · Evaluation · Willingness to pay · Values ·

Memory · Sustainability · Civil economy

1 Introduction

The approaches and methods progressively developed by the evaluation discipline

allow to debate and estimate different dimensions of the value concept, being it
applied to natural, built or cultural resources.
A particular field of investigation is represented for instance by Cultural Heritage
and, in this specific realm, by Industrial Heritage (IH) buildings.
However, the valuation and decision-making process regarding the preservation,
re-use and transmission of this heritage to future generations result to be particularly
challenging, since the scarcity of economic resources, a certain lack of awareness
about its multiple values and the presence of competing interests of different stake-
holders—e.g. owners of the buildings, local government, bodies for the protection of
cultural heritage, potential investors, residents, etc.—make these assets vulnerable
and their existence contested.
More than other material remains inherited from the past, historical industrial
buildings present multiple connections with natural structures, technological infras-
tructures and cultural superstructures, making their valuation complex. Firstly, indus-
trial activity is frequently associated to the transformation of raw materials, thus
entailing a connection with natural structures; additionally, IH buildings are in many
cases part of local landscapes and problematizing the dialogue between natural and
built resources is of particular importance. Secondly, IH in itself can be conceived as a
technological infrastructure, since in many cases industrial buildings and machineries
are the means through which economic activities have developed. Thirdly, IH is
connected to cultural superstructures, because the historical, social and symbolical
significances that are associated to it are the product of a cultural process and they
derive from the values that communities have progressively constructed, negotiated
and transmitted.
In this framework, how is it possible to estimate the values attributed to IH and
take decisions that are sustainable by an environmental, economic but also histor-
ical, social and cultural point of view? As reported by some authors, recent neo-
liberal redevelopment projects have frequently favored profitability to the detriment
of social, historic and cultural values [5], but international guidelines recommend
that adaptive interventions should take into account communities’ points of view and
that the memory component should be definitely maintained [23, 35], also in light
of the principles of intergenerational equity [16].
Given the multidimensional values of IH buildings and the importance of the inter-
generational equity dimension when performing redevelopment projects concerning
Cultural Heritage, the estimation of the perceptions of value by different stake-
holders is particularly challenging; in this framework, the adoption of purely quanti-
tative research methods may not be sufficient [6], and the exploration of alternative
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Redevelopment … 349

approaches (e.g. combining qualitative and quantitative methods) can be benefi-

cial. For instance, the holistic approach is recommended [1, 18, 20], then, other
trajectories focusing on the cognitive dimension of choice and inspired by the so-
called behavioural finance applied to cultural heritage constitute interesting areas of
exploration too [10].
Building on these perspectives (to be furtherly explored in the future), in this
contribution we adopt an integrated approach that builds on traditional quantitative
methods but that at the same time aims to investigate the values attributed to IH build-
ings by different stakeholders and local communities, in line with what proposed by
recent recommendations and holistic approaches. More particularly, we suggest that
the integration of local communities’ perspectives at an early stage of the decision-
making process would allow to timely identify the social and cultural values attributed
to recently abandoned industrial buildings, as well as to map the socio-economic
needs that the community would like to satisfy through redevelopment projects
concerning abandoned industrial areas. In our view, this could represent an important
step to: (a) prevent or at least reduce conflicts among stakeholders; (b) speed up the
decision-making process itself (e.g. avoiding the advancement of projects that do not
take into account multiple perspectives and might thus be questioned); (c) facilitate
potential investors to pinpoint the factors that can make the investment both compet-
itive and attractive; (d) promptly undertake appropriate actions when needed; (e)
enable the implementation of an adaptive evaluation approach fostering progressive,
mutual and collaborative learning [7].
The rest of this contribution is structured as follows: Sect. 2 contextualizes IH
and its multiple values; Sect. 3 provides an empirical example of these concepts
making reference to the case of a recently abandoned industrial complex located on
the Ligurian Coast (Officine Piaggio of Finale Ligure, Italy); Sect. 4 investigates
the values attributed to Officine Piaggio and redevelopment projects through the
analysis of survey data and the application of the willingness to pay (WTP) approach;
additionally, it analyzes respondents’ perceived values and preferences by the means
of non-parametric statistics and it suggests how these results could be integrated in
the decision-making process; finally, Sect. 5 draws some conclusions and disciplinary
considerations.

2 Industrial Heritage: Multidimensional Values

and the Challenges of Sustainable Adaptive Reuse

2.1 Industrial Heritage: Tangible Values, Intangible Values

and Legacies

In the broad realm of Cultural Heritage resources, a particular category is represented

by Industrial Heritage (IH). According to the definitions developed by the Interna-
tional Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the International Committee
350 C. Coscia et al.

for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage (TICCIH), IH consists not only of the
immovable material remains of past or ongoing industrial processes (e.g. sites, struc-
tures, complexes, areas and landscapes), but also of movable assets (e.g. machinery,
documents, etc.) and related intangible values [23]. These values may encompass
the scientific, technological, aesthetic and historical dimensions, as well as the social
one [35]. In fact, it has been acknowledged that industrial activity has frequently
left a profound historical, socio-economic and cultural legacy: if in some cases this
influence has affected either the development of entire regions or the evolution of
history at the global level, in many others it has exerted its effects especially on local
communities, contributing to shape the memory and identity of places and inhabitants
[23, 35].
Even though the concept of IH can be basically applied to any age, the historical
period of principal interest extends from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution
(second half of 18th century) to the present days [35], thus including contemporary
and 19–20th century industrial buildings that may be either active or fallen into disuse
only recently. With reference to the Italian context, an extraordinary example of 20th
century IH is represented for instance by the city of Ivrea, where the Olivetti’s factory,
headquarters and residential buildings were located [2, 11, 12]: the site was inscribed
in the UNESCO World Heritage List in 2018 and its buildings are internationally
renowned not only for their architectural value and for being related to a pioneering
computer company, but also for being the material witnesses of a socio-economic
turn and of an innovative and inclusive idea of society.
Despite the presence of encouraging examples as the one mentioned above, current
evidence shows that IH is nonetheless frequently at risk. This is due to several reasons,
including lack of awareness about its multiple values, environmental issues, changing
economic trends, inadequate legal protection measures and also negative perceptions
[23, 35].

2.2 Abandoned Industrial Buildings: The Values

and Challenges of Adaptive Reuse

Even though in a context of limited economic resources it might be necessary to

perform a selection of the buildings to be promptly restored, an adaptive reuse of
abandoned industrial buildings that is able to respect their architectural elements
[31], interpret their original use and satisfy present needs of the local community
should be recommended [25]. In fact, redevelopment strategies of this kind would
allow in most cases to:
(1) extend the life cycle and embodied energy of existing structures [35];
(2) promote the protection and requalification of the local natural, urban and cultural
landscapes, in light of both soft and hard values [8, 9],
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Redevelopment … 351

(3) generate positive externalities of various kinds, such as land consumption reduc-
tion, increase of local real estate values and development of new economic
activities and jobs [17, 27],
(4) preserve local identity, sense of place and place attachment [29], especially for
generations that have directly experienced the personal, social and economic
effects brought by the industrial activity under consideration,
(5) transmit IH tangible and intangible assets to future generations, coherently
with the principles of intergenerational value and intergenerational equity [16],
overall contributing to the environmental, economic and social sustainability of
the interventions.
Among the points listed above, it must be mentioned that the concept of intergen-
erational value is not new and that it is actually well-established in the estimative
and valuation disciplines, as evidenced for instance by the Total Economic Value
(TEV) framework [12, 13]. Originally developed in the late 1980s-early 1990s in
the realm of environmental economics [34], the TEV of a heritage asset includes
both use and non-use values (i.e. existence value, option value and bequest or inter-
generational value), together with generated externalities [32]. However, with the
dissemination of the principles of sustainable development and of the civil economy
[3], the intergenerational value concept has recently attracted renovated attention [4,
24, 28, 33, 36]. More particularly, civil economy offers an alternative perspective to
modern economic theory [37] and it entails a departure from the profit maximization
paradigm to satisfy the interests of a wide range of stakeholders and achieve common
well-being, which is conceived as “the stock of cultural, environmental, spiritual,
and economic resources that a community can enjoy” [3, p. 1]. Coherently with
this perspective, fundamental principles such as reciprocity and redistribution are
applied also in terms of intergenerational solidarity, and common good is conceived
not as the sum of single utilities and levels of well-being but rather as the result of a
multiplication in which none of the factors can be null.

2.3 Towards the Integration of Local Communities’

Perspectives and Memories in the Decision-Making
Process: Enriching SWOT and Stakeholder Analysis
with Exploratory Surveys

Overall, international bodies for the preservation of built heritage seem to suggest that
redevelopment projects concerning IH buildings should aim to achieve not only envi-
ronmental and economic sustainability but also the cultural and social ones; in this
process, the inclusion of the historical and memory components is thus essential. The
memory—and living memory—perspective particularly applies to 20th century and
recently abandoned industrial buildings: in fact, people’s memories can contribute
to shape heritage meaning and they represent an irreplaceable resource of knowl-
edge [35]; additionally, people’s relationship with IH contributes to the social value
352 C. Coscia et al.

attributed by the community to these material relics. More particularly, it can be actu-
ally advanced that the present generation carries the responsibility for the collection
and transmission of the tangible and intangible values of IH to future ones.
As remarked by IH bodies, “every effort should be made to ensure the consul-
tation and participation of local communities in the protection and conservation of
their local industrial heritage” [35, p. 5]. As a consequence, it is suggested here to
integrate local communities’ perspectives at an early stage of the decision-making
process, collecting local communities’ opinions and perceptions either through focus
groups or through exploratory surveys. In both cases results may then enrich SWOT
and Stakeholder Analysis, which are usually performed in preliminary phases of
the decision-making process. Even though exploratory surveys might be more time-
consuming, the collection of the opinions of a larger number of people allows for
statistical analyses and in some cases even for an estimation of the use and non-use
values attributed to IH complexes. Additionally, results may inform the identifi-
cation of new uses that are compatible with multidimensional sustainability issues.
Figure 1 shows the methodological framework followed in the study, which integrates
the exploration of local communities’ perceptions into more traditional research
approaches. In the proposed framework, the analysis of the context and the mapping
of the stakeholders is combined with the conduction of an exploratory survey. This
survey is addressed to relevant stakeholders and it aims not only to identify the values
attributed to selected IH buildings but also to estimate these values calculating the
WTP for hypothesized redevelopment projects. Results are integrated into traditional
SWOT analysis, functioning as a basis for the proposal of a redevelopment scenario
coherent with local communities’ values and characterized by a higher degree of
social and cultural sustainability.
SWOT analysis was preferred to other techniques informing the decision-making
process for the following reasons: (1) it can be easily replied to other contexts and
scales (e.g. region, municipality, single site, etc.); (2) it takes into account themes
previously identified by experts and researchers (e.g. “memory”, “heritage”, etc.);
(3) strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats emerge from a critical process
entailing the analysis of different data-sources and of data pertaining different scales;
(4) it is able to report in a descriptive and synthetic form the results stemming from
the analysis and related to different stakeholders and redevelopment scales.
Overall, the collection of local communities’ perspectives is not seen here as an
alternative to well-established methods such as panel of experts’ opinions [17, 19,
21, 22, 30], but rather as a step that can contribute to the achievement of social and
cultural sustainability.
With reference to Stakeholder Analysis [14, 15], it is important to recall here that
many actors are usually involved in redevelopment projects of IH. If inhabitants’
and other local communities’ perspectives need to be definitely mapped and heard,
traditional players are—for instance—public (e.g. Municipality, local bodies for the
protection of cultural heritage, such as Soprintendenze in Italy, etc.) but also private
actors (e.g. potential investors and economic subjects). When mapping stakeholders
and integrating perspectives, it is also important to clarify which are the actors that
have decisional power, economic resources and formal influence. For instance, the
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Redevelopment … 353

Fig. 1 Enriching SWOT analysis with Exploratory Surveys about local communities’ perspectives
(source authors’ own elaboration)

application of the salience model—which takes into account power, legitimacy and
urgency [26]—can help clarify reciprocal relationships and areas of influence, as to
make the decision-making process more rational, effective and transparent. Regard-
less of the specific subjects that in different contexts may have decisional power, the
integration of local communities’ opinions by the means of structured analyses may
not only inform the decision-making process in practical and operational terms, but
also arise in decision-makers a higher degree of awareness about the conservation and
redevelopment problem to solve. Then, investigation of the WTP for regeneration
projects could also provide useful data to cost–benefit analysis.
The following Sections will empirically illustrate how the integration of local
communities’ perspectives in the decision-making process about adaptive reuses
of IH can facilitate the agreement of multidimensional, sustainable and informed
interventions.
354 C. Coscia et al.

3 Industrial Heritage in Finale Ligure (Italy): Preserving,

Transmitting and Generating Multidimensional Values

Officine Piaggio are an ex-industrial complex located along the coast and close to
the main communication arteries of Finale Ligure, i.e. an 11,000-inhabitants town
that belongs to the Savona province in Italy. The local economy relies on indus-
trial and craft activities, but especially on summer seaside tourism. The Piaggio
complex—which extended over an area of 52,400 m2 —is today in a state of severe
degradation, but during the 20th century it strongly influenced the economic growth
of the community and village of Finale Ligure.
In 1900 Rinaldo Piaggio (1864–1938) decided to open a new branch of his busi-
ness in Finale Ligure for the wood processing industry and in 1907 the first ware-
houses, designed by the architect Riccardo Haupt, were built close to the railway
line. Due to the expansion of the industrial plant to host the production of airplanes
and seaplanes, the young Piedmontese architect Giuseppe Momo (1875–1940) was
called to build the large experimental hangar in reinforced concrete between 1917
and 1920, as confirmed by the drawings kept in the Turin State Archives. The inno-
vative hangar structure is unusual for an industrial building: it is made up of a single
central nave (22 m height, 26 m width, 100 m length), flanked by five sheds on the
sides. Between 1917 and 1920 Momo also designed the Officine Motori sheds and
in 1937 the Palazzina Uffici, using a rationalist style with stereometric volumes and
ribbon windows. Up to 2000 the Piaggio factory district has grown in specialization
and has played a key role in the aeronautics industry. The factory has been abandoned
since 2013, when it was decided to move the production to Villanova d’Albenga, and
Piaggio decided to sell the property of Officine to the Finalmare S.p.a. Company. In
2007 an Urban Operational Plan (U.O.P.) proposing the demolition of the complex—
with the exception of 200 square meters of the hangar—in favor of the creation of
a new residential and touristic district was advanced. In 2013 a U.O.P. variant allo-
cating some space to public functions but still prioritizing touristic and real-estate
purposes was then proposed.
In 2016 the local Soprintendenza, i.e. the local branch of the Italian Ministry of
Cultural Activities and Heritage, expresses a prohibition of demolition, justified by
the following statement: “With demolition the inseparable relationship between the
natural landscape and the built-up area of the city of Finale would be lost imme-
diately” (declaration of cultural interest, 2016). Additionally, local associations are
asking for the conservation of these architectures. In particular, Salvaguardia del
Finalese association and the national foundation Fondo Ambiente Italiano (FAI) have
organized events and conferences to promote a revision of the proposals advanced
in the U.O.P., which seem to be unsustainable from the environmental and the
socio-cultural points of view.
Given this context, in 2017–2018 we decided to conduct a research including a
survey aiming at: (a) investigating the relationship between the industrial complex
and the Finale Ligure community, e.g. exploring the motivations in favor of the
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Redevelopment … 355

conservation or demolition of the Officine Piaggio structures; (b) identifying pref-

erences and WTP for redevelopment scenarios [13]. In light of the results emerged
from the research, redevelopment scenarios alternative to the official ones and taking
into account the memory values manifested by survey participants were proposed
[13].
Since that research, there have been important changes in the official design
choices hypothesized for the area. Following numerous meetings between the
parties—i.e. the Municipality of Finale and Finalmare S.p.a.—in January 2019, the
Strategic Environmental Assessment (S.E.A.) examination was started and a variant
to the U.O.P. (2013) was proposed. The new project includes:
(a) the construction of a river park of 650 linear meters along the local Pora river,
connected to the newly designed public spaces by paths and squares;
(b) the creation of a 1.2 ha of green area characterized by Mediterranean scrub,
on the western edge of the area (Caprazoppa promontory). The Mediterranean
scrub, that is currently a “residual element” in the areas of the beach free from
bathing facilities, therefore becomes a fundamental element also on the seafront,
distributed within large flower beds;
(c) the creation of five new public spaces, linked to a path of memory: the (covered)
square of the Market, the Piazza degli Idrovolanti, the Aurelia Rediscovery, the
Hangar square and the Marina square;
(d) the creation of a residential settlement with a maximum of 2,000 inhabitants
including residents, tourists and employees of commercial and service activities;
(e) the pedestrianization of a portion (about 250 m) of the Aurelia road, nearly to
the project area and the new river park.
In November 2019 the first reclaim and demolition interventions were carried out
on a portion of the Officine Motori warehouses, close to the Aurelia road. Currently
the new project is awaiting a positive evaluation by the Liguria Region and by the
company Finalmare S.p.a.
In light of this new proposal, it is interesting to compare the scenario outlined in
a previous work—and developed incorporating survey results into SWOT analyses
[13]—with the aforementioned points of the new project for the Piaggio area (Fig. 2).
As can be seen from Fig. 2, the latest updates regarding the future of the former
industrial area are now in line with the scenarios hypothesized by the authors after
including survey results into SWOT and Stakeholder Analysis: less demolitions,
greater presence of green areas and public spaces and the creation of a path linked to
the memory of the historic spaces of the former Piaggio workshops. This example
thus shows that, in the context of the decision-making process that concerns large
redevelopment projects, the integration of results stemming from the dialogue with
all the project stakeholders—including citizens—since early phases could help make
the process more effective, more rapid, less confrontational and more sustainable
by a socio-cultural point of view. In particular, it is interesting to note that in this
last proposed scenario the memory component strongly emerged: as underlined by
previous research [13], this factor is fundamental in understanding the links between
356 C. Coscia et al.

Fig. 2 Industrial heritage redevelopment scenarios proposed by the authors in 2017–2018 and 2019
official proposals: a comparison (source authors’ own elaboration)

the inhabitants and the area of interest and therefore in choosing a requalifica-
tion strategy that keeps it into account. The following paragraph will underline
that enriching descriptive statistics of survey data with the performance of para-
metric/non-parametric tests could provide further insights to the understanding of
the phenomena and to the overall decision-making process.

4 Expressing Preferences and Socio-cultural Values

in Monetary Terms: An Estimation of the Willingness
to Pay for the Regeneration of the Officine Piaggio
in Finale Ligure (Italy)

The elicitation of the WTP for hypothesized scenarios represents a well-established

method to evaluate use and non-use values of cultural heritage resources. Even though
the WTP approach (and contingent evaluation method) present some limits—e.g.
free-rider problem, hypothetical nature of the proposed scenarios, clear identification
of the beneficiaries of projects, etc. [13]—results can be used to identify and estimate
the values attributed to different dimensions (including the socio-economic one)
by different stakeholders, expressed in monetary terms. In previous research the
WTP for redevelopment interventions concerning Officine Piaggio was investigated
and results pointed out that higher WTP values were more frequently associated
to residents rather than non-residents, and that people who actively participated
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Redevelopment … 357

to initiatives against the demolition of the Officine Piaggio complex were more
likely to express the highest WTP values, this suggested that active involvement and
intangible values associated to IH complexes may influence WTP values and also
preferences for the new functions to be selected (e.g. museum) [13]. In order to
better quantify and understand WTP patterns, further analyses have been performed.
In line with previous results, it was decided to investigate in statistical terms whether
residents and non-residents’ WTP were different. More particularly, it was decided
to examine whether WTP values were statistically different for Finale’s citizens,
other inhabitants of the Ligurian region and tourists: in fact, different WTP values
may be an indication of different use and non-use values attributed to heritage and its
adaptive reuse. Given that WTP was elicited in terms of intervals (i.e. 5–10 euros, 10–
20 euros, etc.) and that available data were not normally distributed, the calculation
of WTP means for each group and the performance of parametric tests (i.e. one-way
ANOVA) were not considered as appropriate and robust. As a consequence, it was
decided to explore the issue analyzing available data with non-parametric statistical
techniques. Non-parametric tests measure central tendency using ranked data. Even
though non-parametric techniques may be less powerful than parametric tests and
be subject to type II errors, the main advantages of non-parametric tests are the
following: (a) they are not susceptible to outliers, (b) they do not assume normal
distribution; (c) they can be used in case of non-normal, interval or ratio data that
are highly skewed; (d) they can treat different types of variables; (e) they can be
employed even for small samples.
For the purpose of this study, only the answers of participants who agreed to
express a WTP value were considered and the WTP values of Finale’s inhabitants (n
= 60), Ligurian citizens (n = 50) and tourists (n = 54) were analyzed by the means
of the Kruskal–Wallis test:

12  R2
k
H= i
− 3(n T + 1)
n T (n T + 1) i=1 n i

where:
k = number of populations.
ni = number of observations in sample i.
nT = total number of observations in all samples.
Ri = sum of the ranks for sample i.
Results pointed out that there is a statistically significant difference between the
WTP values of the three groups (H = 11.84; p < 0.01). Further analyses highlighted
that residents attribute higher values to redevelopment projects, followed by tourists
and then Ligurians. The performance of the Kruskal–Wallis test on the WTP values of
the people who defined Officine Piaggio as abandoned buildings/historical buildings/
symbolical buildings did not highlight statistically significant differences instead (H
= 0.58; p > 0.5). Even though additional analyses can be envisioned, these and
previous results seem to suggest that WTP—which reflects both use and non-use
values—may be statistically different for different actors, and that an even deeper
358 C. Coscia et al.

examination of these patterns may provide further indications on intangible values

attributed to IH complexes and on their redevelopment. Finally, it can be added that
it would be fruitful to contemporarily elicit WTP for different scenarios, as to better
highlight favored uses in relation to different characteristics of respondents.

5 Conclusions and Recommendations

Decision-making about IH is a complex process that needs to take into account the
environmental, economic, cultural and social contexts of the buildings, the type and
influence of the stakeholders involved, the memory values attributed to them by
communities and the feasibility of the objectives that investors and public actors
would like to achieve through adaptive reuse interventions. Through the comparison
of the scenarios outlined in 2017–2018 and then in 2019 for the Officine Piaggio
complex in Finale Ligure (Italy), this contribution has highlighted that incorpo-
rating local communities’ perspectives since the early phases of the decision-making
process could allow to timely identify which are the values attributed to aban-
doned IH by the population, outline which are their needs and inform redevelop-
ment scenarios, overall enriching the number and types of factors that need to be
taken into account while conducting decision-making procedures. Then, the perfor-
mance of non-parametric tests on survey data has highlighted that quantitative and
statistical analyses may contribute to problematize survey results, interpret them and
further focus on specific issues. As outlined in previous paragraphs, quantitative
approaches and the estimation of the WTP present some limits, and the exploration
of the intangible values attributed to IH buildings should be performed adopting
a holistic approach able to combine qualitative and quantitative methods. In this
perspective, further steps of research could be represented by the conduction of
focus groups and/or in-depth interviews to selected stakeholders, as to better explore
the multidimensional values attributed to IH buildings and redevelopment projects,
also in light of intergenerational equity.
In the context of a civil economy framework in which intergenerational equity
and a fair redistribution of resources play an important role, the inclusion of
different values and perspectives into decisional processes seems essential, and it
can be advanced that the estimation discipline—with its methodological tools and
approaches—can offer a constructive contribution both to theoretical and operational
applications regarding the valuation and evaluation of complex issues such as the
conservation and adaptive reuse of abandoned IH buildings.

References

1. Aterelli, I (2017) L’applicazione dell’approccio olistico alla valutazione di impatto basata su

indicatori: Il caso dei Fori Imperiali a Roma. MA Dissertation, Politecnico di Torino, Corso di
Industrial Heritage, Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Redevelopment … 359

laurea magistrale in Architettura per il Restauro e valorizzazione del patrimonio. Supervisors:

prof. C. Coscia and prof. R. Navascone, 1st winner of the Brondino Award 2017
2. Barreca A, Curto A, Rolando D (2017) An innovative methodological and operational approach
to developing management plans for UNESCO world heritage sites: a geographic information
system for “Ivrea, industrial city of the 20th century.” Aestimum 55:177–213
3. Becchetti L, Cermelli M (2018) Civil economy: definition and strategies for sustainable well-
living. Int Rev Econ 65:329–357
4. Berni M., Gabrielli L (2018) When efficiency is not enough: should equity be embedded in deci-
sion making and evaluation? In: Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M, Stanghellini
S (eds) Integrated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities. SIEV 2016. Green
energy and technology. Springer, Cham, pp 361–378
5. Boland P, Bronte J, Muir J (2017) On the waterfront: neoliberal urbanism and the politics of
public benefit. Cities 61:117–127
6. Capriotti, P (2017) Per un approccio integrato al patrimonio culturale. Aedon 1
7. Cerreta M, Inglese P, Manzi ML (2016) A multi-methodological decision-making process for
cultural landscapes evaluation: the green Lucania project. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 216:578–590
8. Cerreta M, Inglese P, Malangone V, Panaro, S (2014) Complex values-based approach for
multidimensional evaluation of landscape. In: Proceedings of the international conference on
computational science and its applications, Guimarães, Portugal, 30 June–3 July 2014. Springer,
Cham, Switzerland, pp 382–397
9. Cerreta M, Mele R (2012) A landscape complex values map: integration among soft values and
hard values in a spatial decision support system. In: Murgante B, Gervasi O, Misra S, Nedjah
N, Rocha AMAC (eds) Lecture notes in computer science, proceedings of the computational
science and its applications—ICCSA 2012, Salvador de Bahia, Brazil, 18–21 June 2012, vol
7334. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 653–669
10. Coscia C, Vycpalek M (2010) Valore/valori dei beni culturali: visioni di prospettiva in seno
alle teorie dell’utilità e delle preferenze del consumatore. In: Measuring the value of material
cultural heritage, vol 2. ISBN: 9788890382918, pp 61–66
11. Coscia C, Dalpiaz PE, Giacopelli E, Infortuna GM (2019) The case of the Unità Residenziale
Est - Ex-Hotel La Serra. The Delphi method to support intervention scenarios to “re-type” the
city of Ivrea. Valori e Valutazioni 22:47–65
12. Coscia C, Curto R (2017) Valorising in the absence of public resources and weak markets: the
case of “Ivrea, the 20th century industrial city.” In: Stanghellini S, Morano P, Bottero M, Oppio
A (eds) Appraisal: from theory to practice. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp 79–99
13. Coscia C, Lazzari G, Rubino I (2018) Values, memory, and the role of exploratory methods for
policy-design processes and the sustainable redevelopment of waterfront contexts: the case of
Officine Piaggio (Italy). Sustainability 10:2989
14. Coscia C, Russo V (2018) The valorization of economic assets and social capacities of the
historic farmhouse system in peri-urban allocation: a sample of application of the corporate
social responsible (CSR) approach. In: Bisello A, Vettorato D, Laconte P, Costa S (eds) Smart
and sustainable planning for cities and regions. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp 615–634
15. Coscia C, Zanetta, M (2018) Perché mappare gli stakeholder? L’importanza dello stakeholder
engagement nei processi decisionali. In: Occasioni di Dialogo. Progetto di recupero urbano a
Vinovo: la Piccola Casa della Divina Provvidenza, Cultural Heritage, vol 9, pp 110–122. ISBN:
978-88-85629-31-8
16. De la Torre M (2013) Values and heritage conservation. Herit & Soc 6(2):155–166
17. Dell’Ovo M, Bassani S, Stefaninga G, Oppio A (2020) Memories at risk. How to support
decisions about abandoned industrial heritage regeneration. Valori e Valutazioni 25:107–115
18. Europa Nostra (2015) Cultural heritage counts for Europe. Report http://blogs.encatc.org/cul
turalheritagecountsforeurope/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CHCfE_FULL-REPORT_v2.pdf
19. Ferretti V, Bottero M, Mondini G (2014) Decision making and cultural heritage: an application
of the multi-attribute value theory for the reuse of historical buildings. J Cult Herit 15(6):644–
655
360 C. Coscia et al.

20. Ferrigni F (2013) La gestione dei paesaggi culturali: questione complessa, approccio olis-
tico. In: Ferrigni F (ed) Il futuro dei territori antichi problemi, prospettive e questioni di
governance dei paesaggi culturali evolutivi viventi, EDPUGLIA, pp. 21–34
21. Fregonara E, Coscia C (2019) Multi Criteria analyses, Life Cycle approaches and Delphi
Method: a methodological proposal to assess design scenarios. Valori e Valutazioni 23:107–117
22. Giove S, Rosato P, Breil M (2010) An application of multicriteria decision making to built
heritage. The redevelopment of Venice Arsenale. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 17(3-4):85–99
23. ICOMOS (2011) Joint ICOMOS-TICCIH principles for the conservation of industrial
heritage sites, structures, areas and landscapes. In: 17th ICOMOS general assembly,
Paris. https://www.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_joint_principles_EN_
FR_final_20120110.pdf
24. Lombardi P, Cooper I (2018) Intergenerational justice in the evaluation of urban regenera-
tion projects. In: Mondini G., Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M, Stanghellini S (eds) Inte-
grated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities. SIEV 2016. Green energy and
technology. Springer, Cham pp 341–347
25. Mısırlısoya D, Günc K (2016) Adaptive reuse strategies for heritage buildings: a holistic
approach. Sustain Cities Soc 26:91–98
26. Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and
salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886
27. Mohamed R, Boyle R, Yang AY, Tangari J (2017) Adaptive reuse: a review and analysis of its
relationship to the 3 Es of sustainability. Facilities 35(3/4):138–154
28. Mondini G (2018) An integrated approach for assessing environmental damage and
(inter)generational debt in the definition of territorial transformation policies. In: Mondini G,
Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M, Stanghellini S (eds) Integrated evaluation for the manage-
ment of contemporary cities. SIEV 2016. Green energy and technology. Springer, Cham, pp
1–15
29. Nikolić M, Drobnjak B, Kuletin Ćulafić I (2020) The possibilities of preservation, regen-
eration and presentation of industrial heritage: the case of old mint “A.D.” on belgrade
riverfront. Sustainability 12:5264
30. Oppio A, Bottero M, Ferretti V, Fratesi U, Ponzini D, Pracchi V (2015) Giving space to
multicriteria analysis for complex cultural heritage systems: the case of the castles in Valle
D’Aosta Region, Italy. J Cult Herit 16(6):779–789
31. Romeo E, Morezzi E, Rudiero R (2015) Industrial heritage: reflections on the use compatibility
of cultural sustainability and energy efficiency. Energy Procedia 78:1305–1310
32. Rubino I, Coscia C, Curto R (2020) Identifying spatial relationships between built heritage
resources and short-term rentals before the covid-19 pandemic: exploratory perspectives on
sustainability issues. Sustainability 12:4533
33. Sdino L, Rosasco P, Magoni S (2018) True, fair and beautiful: evaluative paradigms between
the encyclical Letter Laudato Sì and Keynes. In: Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero
M, Stanghellini S (eds) Integrated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities. SIEV
2016. Green energy and technology. Springer, Cham, pp 87–98
34. Sirchia G (2000) I beni culturali come beni economici: le teorie di riferimento. In Sirchia G
(ed) La valutazione economica dei beni culturali, Roma, Carocci, pp 15–32
35. TICCIH - The International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage (2003)
The Nizhny Tagil Charter for the Industrial Heritage. https://ticcih.org/wp-content/uploads/
2013/04/NTagilCharter.pdf
36. Trovato MR, Giuffrida S (2018) The protection of territory from the perspective of the inter-
generational equity. In: Mondini G, Fattinnanzi E, Oppio A, Bottero M, Stanghellini S (eds)
Integrated evaluation for the management of contemporary cities. SIEV 2016. Green energy
and technology, Springer, Cham, pp 469–485
37. Zamagni S (2018) Enhancing socio-economic integration: the civil economy perspective for a
participatory society. In: Donati P (ed) Towards a participatory society. Pontifical Academy of
Social Sciences, Vatican City, pp 240–268
A Decision Support Framework
for a Collaborative Network Strategy
of Cultural Heritage Enhancement: The
Co-HEva Approach

Maria Cerreta, Ludovica La Rocca, and Vincenza Solli

Abstract The European and international debate recognises reusing and enhancing
Cultural Heritage as critical in sustainable and circular urban regeneration strategies.
In addition, some categories of assets, such as former religious buildings, suggest
activating network strategies to consider complex values and implement multi-
method and multi-actor approaches that encourage different stakeholders’ engage-
ment in innovation reuse processes. The paper describes a Decision Support Frame-
work’s proposal, the Collaborative Heritage Evaluation (Co-HEva), based on a multi-
methodological decision-making process tested in actual experience. The aim is to
identify the potential driving assets in structuring a collaborative network strategy
for cultural heritage enhancement and elaborating heritage-led urban regeneration
processes. The application of multi-criteria analysis, characterised by selecting and
defining site-specific criteria and indicators, generates a priorities map useful in
implementing collaborative and cooperative regeneration processes. The action-
research case activated in Salerno’s historical centre in Italy has allowed verifying
the approach effectiveness in supporting the elaboration of public policies oriented
to the regeneration of unused or abandoned religious and cultural heritage as a new
catalyst of vibrancy and vitality.

Keywords Religious cultural heritage · Complex values · Heritage-led urban

regeneration · Circular economy · Social innovation · Multi-methodological
decision-making process · Multi-criteria analysis

M. Cerreta (B) · L. La Rocca

Department of Architecture (DiARC), Federico II University of Naples, 80134 Naples, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
L. La Rocca
e-mail: [email protected]
V. Solli
Urban Regeneration and Social Innovations, Blam, 84133 Salerno, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 361
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_25
362 M. Cerreta et al.

1 Introduction

The European debate recognises cultural heritage (CH) as having a central role
in sustainable development processes and policies. Since the signing of the Faro
Convention in 2005 [14], CH has been considered a fundamental right for human
development and quality of life. 2018, European Year of Heritage [20] has helped
renew and fuel the international debate, focusing on the multiple opportunities
emerging from the regeneration of CH. In a circular perspective [16, 17], the regen-
eration and revitalisation of CH allow to generate new cultural, environmental, social
and economic values [4, 5] and promote processes of reuse, recycling, restoration,
regeneration of resources, avoiding any form of waste and underuse. Remarkably,
the practices of enhancement of the abandoned or “discarded” CH play a signifi-
cant and crucial role [19] not only for the promotion of manufactured capital but
also for the cultural and social capital expressed in these processes. Thus, the CH
can be considered a driver for urban regeneration and local development, increasing
the heritage life cycle, creating new value and promoting local development [34].
In the cultural heritage landscape, the former sacred places represent a network of
goods spread in a capillary way in anthropic landscapes, especially in Italian terri-
tory where communities recognise intrinsic values, expression of intangible identity
values that reside in their cultural traditions, histories, symbols and spiritual ties
that have inspired them over time [28]. The capacity of intrinsic value to connect
communities to religious heritage sites makes these “cultural commons” [7] crucial
in heritage-led urban regeneration strategies and the production of new value chains,
considering the increasing number of buildings disused by the Catholic Church in
Europe. Especially in urban centres and neighbourhood dimensions, it emerges that
heritage does not consist only of single prestigious elements but is instead a system
of assets and values that express the sense of a place where the inhabitants recognise
themselves. This approach implies a systemic interpretation of the territory for an
overall enhancement, an essential prerequisite to strengthening relationships among
the physical, cultural, social and economic components to activate mechanisms of
collaboration and cooperation [18]. These mechanisms represent an increasingly
valuable resource that finds common ground in urban regeneration and social inno-
vation [32, 33]. Innovation is increasingly synonymous with connection [26], and
“networking” today implies building physical and virtual “platforms” that allow the
representation of social and economic contexts where to identify intervention prior-
ities, also in light of the economic and social crisis of our times. In particular, the
CH creates where people spend their lives, influencing their perceptions and values
systems [8] and contributing to social and economic processes. Within the complexity
of existing values belonging to the CH and its context, the evaluation process can
represent a framework capable of supporting and guiding dynamic, collaborative and
cooperative urban strategies that affect new urban multidimensional network nodes.
According to the above reflections, integrated evaluation methods can express both
quantitative and qualitative characteristics of CH to assess individual aspects and
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 363

an overall evaluation [22, 31]. Taking into account these requirements, decision-
making processes [11] related to CH valorisation can rely on multi-criteria methods
[2, 3, 10, 12, 15], able to consider the different heritage aspects, and multi-actor
methods [1, 21, 37], able to include the interests and perspectives of public, private
and social actors. Multi-criteria methods can be implemented in diverse moments
and various levels (strategic, tactical, operative and management) of the valorisation
process and pursuing different objectives, supporting the strategic decision-making,
contributing to the elaboration and identification of possible alternatives, monitoring
the development and assessing the results.
Therefore, this study proposes a multi-methodological process structured during
an action-research project developed through a scientific agreement between the
Department of Architecture of the University of Naples Federico II, the City of
Salerno and the association Blam. The main purpose is to identify a strategy for the
enhancement and sustainable reuse of disused religious CH in a networked territo-
rial perspective for the historic centre of Salerno, in the South of Italy. The proposed
process implemented a multi-methods approach that integrates preferences elicita-
tion, stakeholders’ and citizens’ involvement, elaboration of site-specific indicators
and multi-criteria analysis. A decision support framework was developed to identify
intervention priorities for enhancing the closed, abandoned or disused ecclesias-
tical heritage. The contribution presents in Sect. 2 the materials and methods of the
structured methodological process; in Sect. 3 the case study description and its speci-
ficities; in Sect. 4 the results of the tested case study; in Sect. 5 the discussion of
results and conclusions.

2 Materials and Methods

The identification of an integrated and symbiotic heritage-led regeneration strategy

for the reuse and enhancement of disused religious heritage approached in a network
is a complex issue in which multiple components and different perspectives require
a holistic evaluative approach [30], able to consider synergistically. To this scope,
the research structures a multi-methodological decision-making process, the Collab-
orative Heritage Evaluation (Co-HEva), to explore the characteristics of the former
religious goods by assessing their performances analysed by identifying site-specific
indicators. The application of multi-criteria analysis allows for comparing the
different selected goods, establishing a ranking of priorities of the assets on which
to intervene, and elaborating a strategic map that suggests the integrated lines of a
possible valorisation strategy for supporting policymakers. The evaluative method-
ological framework proposed has been articulated in three main phases: Knowledge
process, Alternatives assessment and Strategy definition (Fig. 1).
364 M. Cerreta et al.

Fig. 1 The collaborative heritage evaluation methodological framework

2.1 Knowledge Process

The Knowledge process integrates the context analysis with the collection and selec-
tion of hard and soft data to build an information matrix related to the analysed
heritage’s characteristics and peculiarities.
First, the context analysis started with a map of different religious assets, focusing
on environmental and urban components (infrastructure, services, public green,
places of cultural interest, location, etc.). The hard and soft data collection has inte-
grated the religious goods map of Salerno’s historic centre, describing their condi-
tions in terms of potentials and critical aspects and detecting how citizens and local
stakeholders perceive them. The hard data express the different quantitative data
necessary to identify the specificities of mapped goods. In particular, the collection
of hard data was structured into the direct observation of each asset to analyse the
state of the heritage, and the documents’ consultation, consulting relevant documents
selected for each property, including textual, photographic, and historical materials.
The soft data include qualitative data valid to investigate the intangible components
of heritage assets by explicating the perceptions and preferences of stakeholders
involved in a stakeholders map through typical techniques of deliberative evaluation
methods for the preferences elicitation [24, 35]: the survey, supported by a ques-
tionnaire to gather perceptions about the relationships between spaces and citizens,
expressed by the Likert scale; in-depth interviews, for a depth knowledge of the rela-
tionship between the mapped goods and the most relevant stakeholders identified;
the experts consultation, to understand the buildings’ actual state and the historical,
architectural, social, environmental and economic components. The complex artic-
ulation of the Knowledge process allowed for structuring an information matrix, an
extensive database in which different information types have been collected for each
analysed cultural good.
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 365

2.2 Alternatives Assessment

The assessment phase was carried out through the Weighted Summation’s multi-
criteria analysis method, intentionally chosen among those applicable with a low
level of difficulty, to make the evaluation process replicable and scaling up to other
decision-making contexts. The Weighted Sum Method (WSM) [39] is a form of
Multi-Attribute Value Theory (MAVT) application [27] and is one of the most popular
Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM) technique, also called Weighted Linear
Combination (WLC), Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), Factor Rating or Simple
Scoring Method. The WSM is a popular, widely known, practically used, and readily
implemented subjective multi-criteria decision-making method that can be easily
executed [36]. In the WSM, the objective functions are summed up with varying
weights, and this sum is optimised. The role of weights is relevant and is also the
topic of many studies that have explored the multiple potentials connected to their
attribution. In addition, the WSM provides a ranking of the alternatives and the
knowledge of their strengths and weaknesses. The proposed methodological frame-
work implemented a multi-objective decision-making software package, DEFINITE
(Decisions on a finite set of alternatives), developed by Ron Janssen and Marine van
Herwijnen in 1987 to improve decision-making quality and facilitate communication
among the actors involved in constructing the decision [29] through graphical tools.
The alternative assessments process is divided into the following steps:
1. The definition of alternatives, represented by the different cultural goods
identified in the phase of the Knowledge process;
2. The selection of criteria and the elaboration of indicators helpful in analysing the
performance of each good both in qualitative and quantitative terms;
3. The assessment and standardisation of scores for each alternative assigning values
to each criterion for all alternatives from the information matrix built into the
Knowledge process;
4. The weighting of criteria to prioritise them according to the objective set in each
of the three thematic clusters;
5. The ranking of the alternatives. Each alternative’s total score is calculated by
multiplying the standardised scores with their appropriate weight, followed by
summing all criteria’ weighted scores. The highest priority index obtained corre-
sponds to the potential driving alternative in each thematic cluster and is relevant
to its strategy structuring.

2.3 Strategy Definition

The elaboration process of the CH regeneration strategy, field-tested, introduces a

collaborative and participatory approach in the methodological framework for the
shared definition of ecclesiastical heritage enhancement in Salerno’s historic centre.
The multi-criteria analysis results were spatialised in a GIS environment to produce
366 M. Cerreta et al.

a priorities map. This strategic map can visually compare the alternatives and a
territorial hierarchy’s total scores. Additionally, the priorities map presents both the
results of the multi-criteria evaluation of each good and the synthesis of citizens’
perceptions expressed in the Knowledge Process phase. In this way, the priorities
map represents an essential tool for communicating each step of the methodological
process’s results and provides the basis for developing the regeneration strategy.
Finally, the interpretation of the priorities map represents the starting point for the
identification of possible scenarios, elaborated by activating a co-creation process
[23, 25, 27, 38] to facilitate the active involvement of stakeholders and implement
shared opportunities.

3 The Case Study

The historic centre of Salerno represents the territory where the methodological
approach was applied and tested. This area extends for about 34 ha and is incredibly
dense with ecclesiastical buildings that, over the centuries, have characterised the
urban landscape. Fifty-three religious buildings were found in the historic neigh-
bourhood of the city, of which 32 were deconsecrated. While 15 of them are large
monasteries, of which 9 have been reused through the implementation of private
functions, hotels, health services, barracks, and school facilities, 17 of the religious
buildings are churches, of which 8 are already reactivated, 7 are under-utilised, and
2 are abandoned (Fig. 2).
Moreover, these former ecclesiastical buildings consist of many different owners
(public administration, religious bodies, private entities) and managers (third sector
entities and foundations).

Fig. 2 The religious cultural heritage map of the historic centre of Salerno
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 367

The enhancement and reuse strategy that aims to build a network of former eccle-
siastical buildings in the historic centre of Salerno starts from the experience of the
project SSMOLL [6] promoted by the association Blam in collaboration with the
Department of Architecture (DiARC) of the University of Naples Federico II and the
Municipality of Salerno. The SSMOLL project has implemented an adaptive process
of transforming the former Morticelli church, abandoned for over 30 years, into a
Creative Living Lab.

4 Results

The Co-HEva proposed methodology’s application describes the results. It highlights

the potential of an approach to support the development of public policies oriented
to the regeneration of the existing CH.

4.1 Knowledge Process

The first phase of contextual knowledge led to a stakeholders map to identify groups
of people, organised or not, to be involved in the whole process. The main stake-
holders include the public administration of Salerno, social and cultural associations
of the historic centre, religious institutions, owners (private, public) and managers of
the assets (private, third sector), entrepreneurs, tourist entities, students, merchants,
and citizens of the historic center. In parallel, the artefact capital analysis gener-
ated a mapping of the former religious buildings in Salerno’s historic center, taking
into account their proximity to primary public transportation services, parking areas,
places of cultural interest, school services, green spaces, squares, and the density
of commercial activities that characterise the area in which each asset is located.
Direct observation supported the analysis of the state of preservation of structures
and surfaces, the presence of valuable elements, the size of the buildings, the pres-
ence of service spaces, architectural, motor and sensory barriers, and the availability
of water and electricity utilities and toilets. Document consultation supported under-
standing the assets’ characteristics and their relationship to the context. The experts
consultation (in restoration, diagnostics, technology, construction techniques and art
history) through focus groups allowed a more technical analysis of the characteristics
of the goods. The in-depth interviews were administered to 10 owners and managers
of former ecclesiastical properties converted to new uses to investigate the frequency
of opening of the spaces, the type of activities carried out and the possible coexistence
of several different functions and to 15 inhabitants to investigate perceptions related
to the mapped properties, exploring the sense of belonging, safety and welcome. An
information matrix (Fig. 3) is structured with the different data types collected as the
basis of criteria and indicators site-specific indicators.
368 M. Cerreta et al.

Fig. 3 The framework of the Information matrix

4.2 Alternatives Assessment

The different cultural assets, identified in the religious, and cultural map and
described in their main characteristics through the information matrix, were consid-
ered the alternatives in the evaluation process, compared through multi-criteria anal-
ysis to understand which one had a better performance, applying the WSM with the
DEFINITE 2.0 software. The cultural assets were divided into three main thematic
clusters. Each was associated with a specific objective to be pursued in the enhance-
ment strategy: active and usable assets (A), identify drivers and to be enhanced in the
short term; inactive and activatable assets (B), identify potential, possible uses and
management models in the medium term; inactive assets (C), identify characteristics
and interventions needed to restore the assets to develop a program of uses that are
synergistic and complementary to those already activated. A decision tree (Fig. 4)
was structured for each cluster, and its objectives, characterised by five criteria and
25 indicators shared with experts. The scales of measurement used for the indicators
are nominal, ordinal and binary:
– Qualitative scale (– – –/+ + + ), where the symbols express the different judg-
ments: high (+ + ± – –), medium (+ ± –), and low (±), for both positive and
negative values, and “0” for moderate;
– Binary scale (Yes/No) that defines the existence of a specific condition for each
evaluated alternative;
– Ratio scale (year, ml, sqm) indicates the main relevant quantitative aspects (time,
distance, surface).
Besides, for each indicator measured, it was indicated whether it represents a cost
or a benefit (c/b), therefore, whether the variation in its size means an advantage or
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 369

Fig. 4 The decision tree of criteria and indicators

a disadvantage concerning the set goal. For each thematic cluster of cultural goods,
the relative Effect tables were elaborated using DEFINITE 2.0 software (Fig. 5). For
every Effect table, data were standardised to make the alternatives comparable with
each other.
Then, the criteria were weighted. Finally, for each cluster of goods, a different
order of importance of the criteria, consistent with the specific objectives, was defined
by applying the expected value technique, through a focus group with the experts
(Fig. 6).
The ranking generated for each cluster shows the order of priority of the alterna-
tives, from the best to the worst, highlighting the indices of priority relative to each
criterion (Fig. 7).
Specifically, the assessment results show that among the assets belonging to cluster
A, the first place in the ranking is occupied by the ex-church of San Sebastiano
del Monte dei Morti where the culture-led SSMOLL project was carried out. The
figure shows the change in absolute and relative indices obtained by comparing the
performance of the cultural asset before and after the adaptive reuse intervention.
Implementing new uses promoted an increase in the “Perception” of citizens and
an overall improvement of the “Urban Context”. Instead, the choice of criteria and
370 M. Cerreta et al.

Fig. 5 The effect table of cluster A

Fig. 6 The weighting of criteria for each thematic cluster

indicators determined the penalisation of assets not publicly available for social and
cultural activities, highlighting how they may be less susceptible to change according
to the strategy’s networked enhancement cultural principles. The software makes it
possible to visualise, through a doughnut chart, how each criterion affects the total
index.
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 371

Fig. 7 Ranking of alternatives in the cluster A

4.3 Strategy Definition

A possible heritage-led regeneration strategy was defined from the ranking analysis
for constructing a synergic and symbiotic network to valorise and reuse the analysed
cultural assets. The results were spatialised into a performance map (Fig. 8) showing
the performance of all alternatives expressed through the priority indices, the potential
of the context represented in a semaphoric scale, and the perceptions of the context
through a graphic pattern. In this case, the Priorities map highlights how the cultural
goods that occupy the last places in the ranking of their related cluster are also
those included in a more critical urban context and perceived negatively by citizens.
The Priorities map is a valuable tool [9] for communicating the territorial ranking
obtained, offering a multi-layer reading [6]. capable of underlining critical issues and
the potential of the area to identify possible priorities for intervention in an overall
strategy.
The definition of the regeneration strategy involves the stakeholders’ group,
initially identified through the stakeholders’ map, in two different phases.
First, the Priorities map was shared with the municipal administration, religious
institutions, managers and owners of public and private spaces. Second, through a
focus group supported by experts, two possible scenarios of intervention were elab-
orated: a short-term one (T1) that connects the buildings belonging to Cluster A
by exploiting a logic of proximity; and a medium-long-term one (T2) that connects
buildings belonging to the three clusters to activate new synergies between aban-
doned and already reactivated goods, starting from the enhancement of urban axes
on which these insist. The following phases were developed in four main steps.
Co-exploration, through video interviews, public assemblies and urban walks, inves-
tigates and maps the territory through its tangible and intangible values, together
372 M. Cerreta et al.

Fig. 8 The priorities map

with the resident and temporary communities. This phase’s outcome was the activa-
tion of dialogue to share practices between the managers and owners of the goods
already reactivated along with axis T1. Instead, for axis T2, urban workshops and
artistic performances were realised for the valorisation and shared knowledge of
abandoned places and their stories. Third, Co-design and Co-evaluation, through
brainstorming, focus groups, design and art workshops, involve residents and students
in designing possible interventions, both material and immaterial, within the envis-
aged scenarios. Co-evaluation guided the decision-making processes of the co-design
phase to define the results to be achieved. Fourth, Co-testing makes performances and
self-construction workshops build temporary structures equipping abandoned spaces
along the urban axes identified in the scenarios. These actions of tactical urbanism
have made it possible, in a short time, to transform public spaces into devices through
which the regenerative strategy can be shared and extended. The process, which is
still ongoing, has activated new energies, arousing the interest and active involve-
ment of citizens, private individuals, associations and public administrations around
the places where the interventions took place.
In conclusion, the activated collaborative network strategy goes through the
building of tangible and intangible relationships. On the one hand, constructing
physical and digital connections between the former church buildings identifies a
territorial brand potentially recognisable to citizens and tourists. On the other hand,
the activated process experiments with constructing a network to identify a shared
management model aimed at living experiences, promoting activities, innovating
reuse practices, and building sustainability opportunities.
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 373

5 Discussion and Conclusion

The Co-HEva methodology proposed and tested in Salerno’s historic centre has
allowed the development of a decision support framework, articulated in phases
and techniques, to define heritage-led regeneration strategies. The objective is to
reuse and enhance the CH disused for worship assets in continuous disuse that share
specific physical and symbolic characteristics. For this reason, it is proposed to build
a synergic and symbiotic network of places, actions, and actors to be implemented,
including tangible and intangible interventions.
The decision-support framework does not aim at identifying the preferred choice
between alternative scenarios but rather at obtaining a ranking of the cultural goods
from which it is possible to activate an incremental valorisation strategy. As explained
through a priorities map, these assets can accommodate change by identifying an
enabling context. In this sense, organising the mapped assets into specific thematic
clusters allows for selecting particular characteristics and objectives for each asset’s
valorisation.
Simultaneously, the choice of criteria and the elaboration of site-specific indica-
tors, based on an in-depth analysis of the context, the goods and the relations between
them and the communities, allow structuring a careful and conscientious evaluation
process, replicable in other contexts with the same objectives. Furthermore, an essen-
tial role is played by the weights attributed to the criteria for the thematic clusters,
which are decisive for the final ranking and which, at the same time, allow to include
of the point of view of experts with different competencies but also consider the
perceptions and preferences of citizens and communities.
The decision support framework’s different phases accompany and guide a
heritage-led regeneration strategy’s elaboration to activate a network of former
church proprieties, integrating collaborative and participatory techniques.
An essential role is played by the weights attributed to the criteria for the thematic
clusters, which are decisive for the final ranking and which, at the same time, allow
to include of the point of view of experts with different competencies but also to
consider the perceptions and preferences of citizens.
The Co-HEva decision support framework’s different phases support and guide the
elaboration of a collaborative network strategy among former church sites, integrating
collaborative and participatory techniques.
The initiated research intends to systematise the Co-HEva approach in developing
a collaborative digital platform [13] to support policymakers engaged in defining
cultural heritage valorisation strategies. In this sense, the future Co-HEva platform
will support an open GIS system, adopt multi-objective decision support systems
and integrate an online community engagement section. The Co-HEva platform is a
tool to support decision-making in terms of the temporal dimension by identifying
actions distributed in the short, medium and long term and the economic and social
dimensions that guide the defined strategy. To this purpose, it is considered neces-
sary to extend the structured process and specifically widen the identified criteria to
comprehensively assess the main dimensions of cultural heritage: social, cultural,
374 M. Cerreta et al.

environmental and economic. Therefore, CH becomes the active node of a complex

system, strengthened by being an integral part of a material and immaterial network
that generates new values and determines positive impacts on the context, capable
of aggregating and consolidating new communities.

Acknowledgements The authors want to acknowledge the experts and communities that partici-
pated in the study, especially prof. Maria Federica Palestino and prof. Andrea Pane of the Depart-
ment of Architecture (DiARC) of the University of Naples Federico II, the Blam team and the
Municipality of Salerno. The study includes part of Vincenza Solli’s master degree dissertation
in Architecture, “EX V(u)oto. Strategie di valorizzazione del patrimonio ecclesiastico dismesso”,
discussed in March 2020.

Author Contributions The authors jointly conceived and developed the approach and decided on
the overall objective and structure of the paper: Conceptualisation, M.C., LL.R., V.S.; Methodology,
M.C., LL.R., V.S.; Software, LL.R., V.S.; Validation, M.C., LL.R., V.S.; Formal Analysis, LL.R.,
V.S.; Investigation, V.S.; Resources, LL.R., V.S.; Data Curation, LL.R., V.S.; Writing-Original Draft
Preparation, M.C., LL.R., V.S.; Writing-Review & Editing, M.C., LL.R., V.S.; Visualization, LL.R.,
V.S.; Supervision, M.C.

References

1. Bäckstrand K (2006) Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking

legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Eur Environ 16(5):290–306. https://doi.org/10.
1002/eet.425
2. Belton V, Stewart T (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer
Academic Publishers
3. Bottero M, Mondini G, Oppio A (2016) Decision support systems for evaluating urban
regeneration. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 223:923–928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.
05.319
4. Bullen PA, Love PED (2011) Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. In: Structural survey, vol
29. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1108/026308011111
82439
5. Cantell SF (2005) The adaptive reuse of historic industrial buildings: regulation barriers, best
practices and case studies. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
6. Cerreta M, Elefante A, la Rocca L (2020) A creative living lab for the adaptive reuse of the
Morticelli church: the SSMOLL project. Sustainability 12(24):10561. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su122410561
7. Cerreta M, Giovene di Girasole E (2020) Towards heritage community assessment: indicators
proposal for the self-evaluation in faro convention network process. Sustainability 12(23):9862
8. Cerreta M, Panaro S (2017) From perceived values to shared values: a Multi-Stakeholder Spatial
Decision Analysis (M-SSDA) for resilient landscapes. Sustainability (Switzerland) 9(7):1113.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071113
9. Cerreta M, Poli G (2013) A complex values map of marginal urban landscapes: an experiment
in Naples (Italy). Int J Agric Environ Inf Syst 4(3):41–62. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijaeis.201
3070103
10. Cerreta M, Poli G (2017) Landscape services assessment: a hybrid Multi-Criteria Spatial Deci-
sion Support System (MC-SDSS). Sustainability (Switzerland) 9(8):1311. https://doi.org/10.
3390/su9081311
11. Cerreta M, Poli G, Regalbuto S, Mazzarella C (2019) A multi-dimensional decision-making
process for regenerative landscapes: a new harbour for Naples (Italy). Lecture notes in
A Decision Support Framework for a Collaborative Network Strategy … 375

computer science (including subseries Lecture notes in artificial intelligence and lecture notes
in bioinformatics), vol 11622 LNCS, pp 156–170
12. Cerreta M, Poli G (2020) A collaborative spatial decision support system (C-sdss) for strategies
of territorial coopertion: the Cilentolabscape project. Valori e Valutazioni 2020(25):11–19
13. Coscia C, De Filippi F (2016) The use of collaborative digital platforms in the perspective of
shared administration. The MiraMap project in Turin1. Territorio Italia, pp 61–104. https://doi.
org/10.14609/Ti_1_16_4e
14. Council of Europe (2005) Council of Europe framework convention on the value of cultural
heritage for society
15. Daldanise G (2020) From place-branding to community-branding: a collaborative decision-
making process for cultural heritage enhancement. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1
22410399
16. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017) Cities in the circular economy: an initial exploration. Ellen
MacArthur Foundation
17. European Commission (2014) Towards a circular economy: a zero waste programme for
Europe. In: COM, vol 398
18. European Commission (2016) Open innovation open science Opent to the World - a vision for
Europe. https://doi.org/10.2777/061652
19. European Environment Agency (2016) Circular economy in Europe: developing the knowledge
base. Eur Environ Agency. https://doi.org/10.2800/51444
20. European Parliament (2017) Decision (EU) 2017/864 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 17 May 2017 on a European Year of Cultural Heritage (2018). Official Journal of
the European Union
21. Evans P, Schuurman D, Ståhlbröst A, Vervoort K (2017) Living lab methodology handbook.
U4IoT Consortium
22. Fusco Girard L (2011) Multidimensional evaluation processes to manage creative, resilient and
sustainable city. Aestimum 59:123–139. https://doi.org/10.13128/Aestimum-10464
23. Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1989) Fourth generation evaluation
24. Hirons M, Comberti C, Dunford R (2016) Valuing cultural ecosystem services. Annu Rev
Environ Resour 41:545–574. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085831
25. House ER, Howe KR (2000) Deliberative democratic evaluation in practice. In: Stufflebeam
DL, Madaus GF, Kellaghan T (eds) Evaluation models. evaluation in education and human
services. Springer, pp 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47559-6_22
26. Hwang VW, Horowitt G (2012) The rainforest: the secret to building the next Silicon Valley.
Regenwald Los Altos Hills, CA
27. Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-
offs. Cambridge University Press
28. Lindblad H, Löfgren E (2016) Religious buildings in transition. An international comparison.
29. Marler RT, Arora JS (2010) The weighted sum method for multi-objective optimization: new
insights. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41(6):853–862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-009-0460-7
30. Mısırlısoy D, Günçe K (2016) Adaptive reuse strategies for heritage buildings: a holistic
approach. Sustain Cities Soc 26:91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.05.017
31. -
Mrak I (2014) Evaluation methods in the protection of built heritage. Gradevinar 66(02):127–
138
32. Murray R, Caulier-Grice J, Mulgan G (2010) The open book of social innovation. National
endowment for science, technology and the art London
33. Murray R, Mulgan G, Caulier-Grice J (2008) How to innovate: the tools for social innovation,
28 April 2012
34. Pereira Roders A, van Oers R (2011) Bridging cultural heritage and sustainable development.
J Cult Herit Manag Sustain Dev 1(1):5–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/20441261111129898
35. Proctor, W., & Drechsler, M. (2006). Deliberative multicriteria evaluation. Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy, 24(2), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1068/c22s
36. Sorooshian S, Parsia Y (2019) Modified weighted sum method for decisions with altered
sources of information. Math Stat 7(3):57–60. https://doi.org/10.13189/ms.2019.070301
376 M. Cerreta et al.

37. Treichel K, Höh A, Biermann S, Conze P (2017) Multi-stakeholder partnerships in the context
of agenda 2030: a practice-based analysis of potential benefits, challenges and success factors.
Bonn: Partnerships, 2030
38. Van Der Meer F-B, Edelenbos J (2006) Evaluation in multi-actor policy processes: account-
ability, learning and co-operation. Evaluation 12(2):201–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/135638
9006066972
39. van Herwijnen M, Rietveld P (1999) Spatial dimensions in multicriteria analysis. In: Thill J-C
(ed) Spatial multicriteria decision making and analysis. A geographic information sciences
approach. Routledge, pp 77–99
The Public Private Partnership
for the Effective Enhancement
and Management of Existing Property
Assets: The Case of Torrevecchia
Complex (Rome)

Francesco Tajani, Pierluigi Morano, Spartaco Paris, and Felicia Di Liddo

Abstract In the present research the analysis of the financial feasibility of a Public
Private Partnership (PPP) intervention, related to the enhancement and management
of a social housing complex, has been carried out. With reference to the redevelop-
ment initiative of Torrevecchia area located on the western periphery of the city of
Rome (Italy), the Discounted Cash-Flow Analysis (DCFA) has been implemented.
The study aims to verify the efficiency in the use of the PPP operational tool through
the assessment of the costs and the revenues deriving from the renovation and the
expansion of the considered complex. In the analysis, a periodic fee paid by the Public
Administration to the private investor has been considered and determined, able to
ensure the financial sustainability of the initiative and to comply with the regulatory
constraints in the Italian context. The redevelopment initiative analyzed demonstrates
the relevant role played by PPP procedures in the context of urban regeneration and
functional reconversion of collective interest properties, able to identify a compro-
mise solution between the current contraction of the public spending capacity and
the financial feasibility of the territorial investments.

F. Tajani
Department of Architecture and Design, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Flamina 359, 00196
Rome, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Morano · F. Di Liddo (B)
Department of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry, Polytechnic
University of Bari, Via E. Orabona 4, 70126 Bari, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Morano
e-mail: [email protected]
S. Paris
Department of Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via
Gramsci, 00196 Rome, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 377
S. Giuffrida et al. (eds.), Science of Valuations, Green Energy and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53709-7_26
378 F. Tajani et al.

Keywords Public private partnership · Enhancement initiatives · Existing public

assets · DCFA · Financial feasibility

1 Introduction

A significant issue related to the enhancement of existing property assets concerns the
scarce public economic resources to be used for their physical recovery [2, 10, 15, 16,
20]. An inadequate assessment of the functions to be introduced and a scarce attention
to the property management phase represent a fundamental risk for the renovation
initiative success [5]. It is known, in fact, that often recovered properties remain
unused due to the lack of resources for their management. In this sense, the procedures
of Public Private Partnership (PPP) allow to involve private financial resources able
of carrying out building and/or urban redevelopment operations [1, 19, 25].
Currently, the management measures of existing assets constitute an important
stimulus in the private construction sector, due to the sharp decrease of the real estate
market and the Public Administration budget cuts. Furthermore, the strong need of
the managing entities to provide for the restructuring of their property asset must be
added, mostly built in the decades following the World War II, which inexorably is
coming close to the end of its life cycle without adequate recovery interventions.
The scarcity of public economic resources and the high specialized skills required
in the transformation and management processes make it increasingly necessary
to use forms of collaboration between the public sector and private investors
[6, 7, 9, 14, 21].
In the Italian context, the property asset enhancement is regulated by Art. 58 of
the Law Decree No. 112, June 25, 2008 [4]. According to this regulation, to proceed
with the reorganization, management and enhancement of the Regions, Provinces,
Municipalities and other local property assets, each public Entity identifies the prop-
erties located in the competence area that are not appropriate for the institutional
intended uses and are suitable to their enhancement or disposal. The inclusion of the
properties in the recovery plan determines the consequent classification as available
assets, taking into account the historical-artistic, archaeological, architectural and
landscape-environmental constraints. Therefore, the specific plan is analyzed by the
competent entities, in order to make the aforementioned definitive classification.
A considerable importance role is played by Art. 27 of the Italian Law Decree.
No. 201, December 6, 2011—Urgent provisions for the growth, equity and consoli-
dation of public accounts—, converted into Law No. 214, December 22, 2011, which
introduced the “Unit Territorial Enhancement Program” (PUVaT), as a governance
tool for the best use of public properties [18]. The PUVaT is aimed at starting,
implementing and concluding, in a specific time, an enhancement process for the
properties in line with the territorial development guidelines and with the economic
planning that may constitute, within the economic and social reference context, a
stimulus and attraction element of sustainable local development interventions and
public services.
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 379

The need to overcome the economic limits and to recovery the current building
stock has led to the implementation of public utility initiatives that can determine a
sufficient profitability for private subjects. For some specific sectors, such as telecom-
munications or energy management, the ability to generate profits is more evident,
for other ones, defined as “cold” works, the profitability deriving from the realiza-
tion of the project must be encouraged through public contribution forms, so that the
private investors can make bear the risks of the investment.

2 Aim

The present research concerns the framework outlined. The study analyzes the feasi-
bility of a redevelopment initiative of a public property asset, represented by the
social housing buildings of Torrevecchia (Rome, Italy), through a PPP procedure
that provides the involvement of a private investor for the renovation, the expan-
sion and management of the complex. In order to ensure the sustainability of the
initiative for the private operator, a financial sharing of the Public Administration
through a periodic monetary amount has been provided, able to define the conve-
nience threshold of the private balance sheet and to comply with the regulatory
constraints imposed by the Italian Legislative Decree No. 50/2016, art. 180, par. 6.
According to this regulatory provision, the total monetary subsidy burdened by the
Public Administration “[…] must not exceed 49% of the total investment cost of the
PPP initiative, including any financial charges”.
The paper is structured as follows. In Sect. 3, the case study and the current state
of the building typologies of the complex of Torrevecchia are described. In Sect. 4,
the redevelopment initiative to be assessed is illustrated. In Sect. 5, the Discounted
Cash-Flow Analysis (DCFA) is implemented for verifying the private convenience of
the initiative, by calculating the periodic fees to be paid by the Public Administration
that ensure both the sustainability of the private balance sheet and the compliance
with the Italian regulatory provisions. Finally, in Sect. 6 the conclusions of the work
are discussed.

3 Case Study

3.1 Description of the Social Housing Complex

of Torrevecchia

The case study concerns the redevelopment project of the social housing complex of
Torrevecchia, located in an urban area on the western periphery of the city of Rome
(Italy). The complex is owned by the Agency for Public Residential Buildings in the
Rome municipality (ATER), an economic regional public institution that manages a
380 F. Tajani et al.

Fig. 1 Social housing

complex of Torrevecchia (red
circle) in the city of Rome

property asset composed by 48,000 residential units, especially social housing ones.
Until the 1960s, Torrevecchia area was used for agricultural purposes with small
few houses to serve the large agricultural farms. In the following years, the area was
affected by a rapid urban expansion, aimed at better getting connected to the city.
Despite the presence of numerous green spaces that are not urbanized as a result
of the expansion of the second half of the twentieth century process, the district is
devoid of equipped public parks. Figure 1 shows the location of the social housing
complex of Torrevecchia in the urban context of the city.
The Torrevecchia complex (Fig. 2) is a social housing intervention carried out
on an area of about 24 hectares using funds provided by the Law No. 584/1977.
The complex has been built around a central square, defined by four tower houses
characterized by fifteen floor levels with offices, a bar and a social center. A high-
altitude pedestrian path connects the square to Via di Torrevecchia, around which two
3-storey high buildings are placed. In particular, on the ground floor level stores are
located, whereas the other two levels are occupied by residential units. In correspon-
dence to the square, four low-rise houses from four to six floors branch off. Thanks
to the buildings localization, two green spaces are respectively intended for a small
public park and sports equipment. In brief, the Torrevecchia complex is divided into
three building typologies (Fig. 3): courtyard buildings, low-rise housing buildings
and tower buildings.
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 381

Fig. 2 The social housing complex of Torrevecchia

Fig. 3 The different typologies of buildings in the complex of Torrevecchia

3.1.1 Courtyard Buildings

The courtyard buildings are the most underused typology of the complex and they
allocate only 8% of the entire population of the case study. They are developed on
two parallel blocks, in addition to an isolated one in the complex center, with part
of the ground floors intended for commercial use and storage rooms. The courtyard
382 F. Tajani et al.

Fig. 4 The courtyard buildings

buildings involve three levels, with the first floors served by stairs overlooking the
internal courtyard.
The main criticalities found for the courtyard buildings concern: the generalized
problems of meteoric water infiltration, both at the roof level and in the joints of
the prefabricated elements on the facade; the lack of thermal comfort, especially
in the summer; a low insulation quality of the building envelope; the lack of heat
mitigation systems. Furthermore, a strong degradation state in the quality of the
finishings, especially on the facades, has been detected, due to the lack of adequate
periodic maintenance interventions.
Figure 4 shows the courtyard buildings (yellow ones) of the social housing
complex of Torrevecchia.

3.1.2 Low-Rise Housing Buildings

The low-rise housing buildings are the most spread typology in Torrevecchia
complex, as they allocate 62% of the total population. The typological distri-
bution includes three flats per floor level served by a staircase. In particular,
the social housing complex is combined in two—scale buildings—8 in all—or
three-scale—overall 10 buildings.
To accommodate the morphological characteristics of the area, the buildings’
heights vary between four and seven floors. Moreover, each building has the entrance
hall and storage rooms on the ground floor, whereas the other levels are intended for
housing. Finally, at the last floor level there are the technical rooms.
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 383

Fig. 5 The low-rise housing buildings

The main critical issues of the low-rise housing buildings refer to the bad salubrity
state of the toilet rooms, where the air exchange is performed by natural ventila-
tion through the shafts. The present problem becomes evident as the shafts heights
increase—and therefore the number of rooms to be served. Furthermore, the lack of
thermal comfort in the houses due to a low insulating quality of the building envelope
and the lack of heat mitigation systems represent other relevant negative aspects. In
the single-sided apartments, this critical issue is amplified by the lack of natural venti-
lation inside the rooms. Finally, a progressive decay state in the finishings quality,
especially on the outside spaces, is detected.
Figure 5 shows the low-rise housing buildings (blue ones) of the social housing
complex of Torrevecchia.

3.1.3 Tower Buildings

In the Torrevecchia district there are four identical tower buildings which allocate
30% of the complex inhabitants. They are developed on fifteen levels above ground
and a basement for storage rooms. On the remaining floors there are houses with a
typological distribution of six apartments per floor of two different types. Starting
from the thirteenth level, there are two apartments per floor up to the final level where
there are technical rooms.
Generalized problems of meteoric water infiltration and bad salubrity conditions
are found. Then, especially in the summer seasons, the lack of thermal comfort and
of heat mitigation systems are detected.
384 F. Tajani et al.

Fig. 6 The tower buildings

Figure 6 shows the tower buildings (purple ones) of the social housing complex
of Torrevecchia.

4 The Redevelopment Initiative

4.1 The Renovation of the Existing Buildings

Considering the specific characteristics of the building typologies of the case study
considered in the research, the interventions identified have been grouped into three
types (“A”, “B”, “C”).
The intervention A concerns the courtyard buildings. The project refers the
improvement of the energy efficiency of each building through the construction of
a new building envelope, both opaque and transparent, and the installation of new
systems supported by production of energy from renewable sources. The interven-
tion will also sort out the problems of infiltration from roofs and accessibility to
the ground floors of the buildings. The planned workings involve operations to be
carried out especially on the outside of the houses and, therefore, the removal of
tenants from their houses is not required.
The intervention B concerns the low-rise housing buildings. The project aims to the
improvement of the building energy efficiency through the new envelope realization,
and the installation of new systems for the energy production from renewable sources.
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 385

Compared to the intervention A, there are no building workings on the roofs as they
have recently been carried out. Similarly to the intervention A, the project B does
not provide for the transfer of building tenants from their houses.
The intervention C refers to the tower buildings. This typology is the most expen-
sive, both for the number of current critical issues detected and for the difficulty
of building realization due to the height of them. Furthermore, by considering the
building sizes, the aspects concerning the structures must also be taken into account.
In particular, the project C provides for—in addition to all the workings planned
for the intervention A—the improvement of the building structures. The initiative
involves buildings’ exterior and interior parts; therefore, it is necessary to provide
for the temporary transfer of tenants to other accommodations.

4.2 The PPP Procedure

The hypothesis assumed in the present research is that a PPP procedure is imple-
mented for the effective renovation of the existing buildings of the complex of
Torrevecchia. In addition to the benefits deriving from overcoming the constraints
on public spending and on budget balances, the use of the PPP can generate different
advantages for the community in terms of management efficiency, quality of workings
and effectiveness of services for the community [8, 17]. In particular, it is assumed
that an onerous and written agreement is established between the public subject (i.e.
the ATER) and a private investor for a fixed time period (equal to 25 years), in order
to refurbish the existing buildings and provide for the ordinary maintenance up to the
planned deadline. In exchange for these burdens, the private investor is remunerated
through (i) the free ownership transfer of a building land plot, to be transformed in
housing units to be sold, (ii) a periodic fee paid by the public subject, that is neces-
sary to ensure the private convenience of the redevelopment initiative, but that cannot
exceed the threshold fixed by the Italian Legislative Decree No. 50/2016 (i.e. 49%
of the total investment costs, including any financial charges).
In Fig. 7 the localization of the building land plot to be freely transferred to the
private investor for the effectiveness of the PPP procedure is shown.
The building lad plot extends for approximately 25,000 m2 and is located not far
from the social housing complex of Torrevecchia. The hypothesis assumed concerns
the construction of new buildings in the southern part of the lot, near the main road
axis, occupying an area of about 11,000 m2 . The remaining part will be equipped for
public use: the project solution, in fact, includes a square (about 1,000 m2 ), different
green spaces (about 9,000 m2 ) and some parking areas (about 1,900 m2 ). Table 1
shows the articulation of the public and private surfaces of the building land plot.
In order to summarize the steps required by the PPP procedure in analysis, in
Fig. 8 the succession of the executive phases related to the realization of the new
housing units on the building land plot and the renovation of the existing buildings
of the complex of Torrevecchia is reported.
386 F. Tajani et al.

Fig. 7 Localization of the building land plot to be transferred to the private investor

Table 1 Public and private

Building land plot surface (m2 ) 25,161
surfaces of the building land
plot Surface for public use (m2 ) 13,932
Surface for private use (m2 ) 11,229
Total number of floor levels (n.) 5

5 Implementation of the DCFA

In order to verify the financial feasibility of the redevelopment intervention of

Torrevecchia, it is necessary to define if the project will be able to generate an adequate
profit for the private investor. The participation of a private operator, individual or—
more frequently—in a corporate form, in a process of recovery and transformation
of a public property or an urban area, presupposes the satisfaction of the financial
criterion of the initiative, i.e. its capacity to remunerate the capital initially invested
and to provide a monetary surplus.
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 387

Fig. 8 Executive phases

related to the realization of
the new buildings and the
renovation of the existing
buildings

With reference to the case study, the assumptions of the analysis can be
summarized as follows:
– the period of the analysis is equal to 25 years, divided into 50 semesters in the
temporal distribution considered in the DCFA development;
– the minimum annual return rate expected by the private investor is equal to 10%.
This amount has been determined taking into account the risks of similar initiative
in the reference market;
– the discounted rate used for the DCFA is considered equal to the minimum annual
return rate expected by the private investor (=10%). As the analysis period has
been divided into semesters, the used discounted rate is equal to 4.88%;
– the analysis is carried out considering the current and constant prices.
388 F. Tajani et al.

The cost (investment and management) and the revenue items necessary for the
development of a DCFA are assessed as follows.
Costs
Investment costs. They are related to (i) the realization of the new complex and (ii)
the renovation of the existing one.
The first one concerns the realization of housing units, the square, public green
spaces, parking areas and roads. With reference to the new houses, in the Table 2 the
temporal distribution of the respective construction costs are reported.
The renovation of the existing complex involves the refurbishment costs of the
courtyard buildings (intervention A), the low-rise housing buildings (intervention B)
and the tower buildings (intervention C). For each typology, the refurbishment costs
are assessed by consulting local operators and the data reported in the “Building
typology prices” list [3]. In Table 3 for each building typology, the total surface, the
unit and the total refurbishment costs of the recovery intervention are summarized.
With reference to the temporal distribution of the refurbishment costs, Tables 4,
5 and 6 show the assumption considered for each building typology. It should be
observed that the interventions B and C start in the 8° semester, at the end of the
courtyard buildings intervention. This assumption takes into account, on the one
hand, the possibility to lighten the total investment costs for the private investor,
by spreading them over the analysis period (especially for the intervention B), on
the other hand, the contingence that the intervention C provides for the temporary
transfer of tenants to other accommodations during the corresponding workings.
Among the investment costs, the technical expenses and the concession charges are
included. The technical expenses represent the fees for technicians and professionals
and are assumed equal to 6% of the sum of the total construction and refurbishment
costs. The concession charges are determined in percentage of the total construction
and restructuring costs of the initiative, with reference to published municipal tables.

Table 2 Temporal distribution of the construction costs of the new housing units
Housing units
Semesters 1° 2° 3° 4° 5° 6° 7°
Costs (%) 5 10 20 20 25 15 5

Table 3 Total surfaces, unit and total refurbishment costs of the recovery intervention
Intervention Typology Total surface (m2 ) Unit cost (e/m2 ) Total costs (e)
A Courtyard 13,614 450 6,126,300
buildings
B Low-rise housing 73,826 385 28,423,044
buildings
C Tower buildings 25,800 780 20,124,000
Total 54,673,344
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 389

Table 4 Temporal distribution of the refurbishment costs of the courtyard buildings

Intervention A—courtyard buildings
1° 2° 3° 4° 5° 6° 7° 8° 9° 10° 11° 12° …
– – 10% 15% 15% 25% 20% 15% – – – – –

Table 5 Temporal distribution of the refurbishment costs of the low-rise housing buildings
Intervention B—low-rise housing buildings
1° … 8° 9° 10° 11°–22° 23° 24° 25° …
– – 5.56% 5.56% 5.56% 5.56% 5.56% 5.56% 5.56% –

Table 6 Temporal distribution of the refurbishment costs of the tower buildings

Intervention C—tower buildings
1° … 8° 9° 10° 11° 12° 13° 14° 15° …
– – 15% 15% 20% 20% 20% 10% – – –

In the specific case, these charges will pay in correspondence of the 3°, 5° and 7°
semester.
Management costs. They are determined taking into account the operating costs
ordinarily burdened by ATER and by consulting local market operators. In this sense,
it is assumed that, from the end of the realization process (in 25° semester), during the
agreement period the private investor has to provide for the management costs of the
Torrevecchia complex. Therefore, the annual management cost is estimated equal to
about 0.7% of the refurbishment costs, that corresponds to 182.500 e for semester,
be paid from 26° semester up to the end of the analysis period (50° semester).
Overheads. These costs are related to the expenses for the real estate company
constitution—assessed equal to 2% of the construction and refurbishment costs—
and the marketing expenses—assessed equal to 2% on the revenues related to the
sale of the new housing units. These costs are temporally distributed over the entire
analysis period.
Financial charges. These costs identify the interests on the capital borrowed for
the realization of the investment. The annual interest rate considered is equal to
1.38% (=0.69 for semester), as provided for similar operations by Banca d’Italia,
and it is calculated on the negative financial exposures that the private investor will
incur during the realization of the project.
Taxes. These costs are assessed according to the ordinary fiscal expenses (IRES,
IRAP) provided by the Italian laws. They are assumed equal to about 30% of the
positive cash-flows obtained by the difference between the revenues and all the
previously listed costs.
390 F. Tajani et al.

Revenues
The project hypothesis considered in the research provides that the revenue items for
the investor will derive from (i) the sale of the housing units and (ii) the periodic fee
that the Public Administration must pay to the private.
Sale of the new housing units. The assessment of the revenues to be obtained from
the housing units selling is connected to the analysis of the current property prices
in the urban area in which Torrevecchia complex is located and to the determination
of the most likely market value by considering the higher attractiveness expected
following the redevelopment initiative. The unitary market value assessed is equal
to 3,300 e/m2 . Table 7 shows the temporal distribution assumed for the sales.
Periodic fee. It is hypothesized that the Public Administration will pay a monetary
amount for each semester of the entire analysis period. This assumption is manda-
tory to ensure the convenience of the entire operation for the private investor, i.e.
the minimum annual return rate equal to 10%: otherwise, the project would be char-
acterized by a negative Net Present Value (NPV) and consequently it could not be
realized. At the same time, the actualized total amount of the periodic fees must be
lower than 49% of the sum of investment costs and financial charges, in order to
comply with the regulatory constraints imposed by the Italian Decree No. 50/2016,
art. 180. Therefore, the periodic fee is assessed (i) by considering a “full” down
payment from the 7° semester, whereas for the previous semesters reduced amounts
are provided (=25% for the 1° and 2° semesters, 50% for the 3° and 4° semesters,
75% for the 5° and 6° semesters), (ii) by ensuring the satisfaction of the private
convenience threshold, i.e. an annual return rate equal to 10%, (iii) by verifying the
regulatory provision, i.e. that the actualized sum of the periodic fees is lower than
49% of the sum of the total investment costs and the financial charges of the entire
operation. Taking into account an annual rate equal to 3% for the actualization of the
public periodic fees, the “full” down payment paid by the Public Administration and
able to satisfy the conditions described above is equal to 1,260,000 e. This amount,
on the one hand, is able to ensure the financial convenience of the investment for the
private operator, as the NPV is equal to 54,244 e and the Internal Return Rate (IRR)
is equal to 10.08%, on the other hand, is compliant with the regulatory provision, as
the actualized sum of the public periodic fees (=40,571,359 e) is lower than the sum
of the total investment costs and the financial charges (=43,385,637 e).
In Fig. 9 the development of the DCFA is reported.

Table 7 Temporal distribution of the new housing unit sales

New housing units
Semesters 6° 7° 8° 9° 10° 11° 12°
Sales (%) 20 20 20 20 10 5 5
The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 391

Fig. 9 Development of the DCFA for the case study

392 F. Tajani et al.

6 Conclusions

With reference to the PPP tools for the enhancement of public property assets, in the
present research the financial feasibility assessment of a real case study, concerning
the redevelopment of the social housing complex of Torrevecchia (Rome, Italy) has
been carried out.
According to the redevelopment project of the Torrevecchia complex, the existing
properties are renovated in terms of technological, structural and plant engineering
efficiency. Houses that are currently characterized by an evident degradation state,
due to the lack of adequate periodic maintenance interventions, will be totally refur-
bished. In general terms, the enhancement and management processes of the existing
Torrevecchia complex and the new realization intervention aim at the improvement
of the life quality of the area inhabitants and users, with renovated, energy-efficient,
hygienically healthy houses and public spaces.
The implementation of the DCFA have allowed to verify the capacity of the
initiative to adequately offset the risks for the private investor. In this sense, the
cooperation between the Public Administration and the private investor represents
an answer to the need for effective strategies, aimed at finding new functions for
disused buildings or abandoned areas.
The project feasibility has been confirmed by the assessed NPV and IRR values
and by the analysis of the sustainable periodic fee to be paid by the Public Administra-
tion to the private investor. In particular, the public contribution assessed represents
an optimal Pareto frontier of two conflictual goals: (i) the financial convenience of
the initiative for the private investor; (ii) the compliance with the regulatory provision
(Italian Decree No. 50/2016, art.180). The dual aim that leads to the determination of
the public down payment gives interesting implications in the DCFA implementation.
Further insights of the research may concern the application of a sensitivity anal-
ysis on the results obtained, e.g. by considering different convenience thresholds of
the private investor or different cost items and relative amounts, in order to define the
critical variables of the analysis that might cause relevant variation in the outputs.
Furthermore, it could be interesting to analyze the social benefits deriving from the
enhancement initiative of the Torrevecchia complex through a Cost–Benefit Anal-
ysis [22], in order to assess the investment sustainability for the local community
according to the social, energy retrofit and environmental needs.

Notes: The work must be attributed in equal parts to the authors.

The Public Private Partnership for the Effective Enhancement … 393

References

1. Adair A, Berry J, McGreal S, Deddis B, Hirst S (2000) The financing of urban regeneration.
Land Use Policy 17(2):147–156
2. Calabrò F, Della Spina L (2018) La fattibilità economica dei progetti nella pianificazione strate-
gica, nella progettazione integrata, nel cultural planning, nei piani di gestione. Un modello sper-
imentale per la valorizzazione di immobili pubblici in Partenariato Pubblico Privato. LaborEst,
16
3. Collegio degli Ingegneri e Architetti di Milano (2019) Prezzi Tipologie Edilizie. DEI Tipografia
del Genio Civile. Quine Business publisher
4. Decree Law No. 112, 25 June 2008
5. Del Giudice V, De Paola P, Torrieri F (2014) An integrated choice model for the evaluation
of urban sustainable renewal scenarios In: Advanced materials research, vol 1030. Trans Tech
Publications Ltd., pp 2399–2406
6. Glumac B, Han Q, Schaefer W (2018) A negotiation decision model for public–private
partnerships in brownfield redevelopment. Environ Plan B: Urban Anal City Sci 45(1):145–160
7. Guarini MR, Battisti F (2014) Benchmarking multi-criteria evaluation methodology’s applica-
tion for the definition of benchmarks in a negotiation-type public-private partnership. A case
of study: the integrated action programmes of the Lazio Region. Int J Bus Intell Data Min
9(4):271–317
8. Hodge GA, Greve C (2007) Public–private partnerships: an international performance review.
Public Adm Rev 67(3):545–558
9. Kaganova O, Nayyar-Stone R (2000) Municipal real property asset management: an overview
of world experience, trends and financial implications. J Real Estate Portfolio Manag 6(4):307–
326
10. Las Casas G, Scorza F, Murgante B (2018) New urban agenda and open challenges for urban
and regional planning. International symposium on new metropolitan perspectives. Springer,
Cham, pp 282–288
11. Law Decree. No. 201, 6 December 2011
12. Law No. 214, 22 December 2011
13. Italian Legislative Decree No. 50, 18 April 2016
14. Leung BY, Hui EC (2005) Evaluation approach on public-private partnership (PPP) urban
redevelopments. Int J Strat Prop Manag 9(1):1–16
15. Liu J, ED Love P, Smith J, Regan M, Sutrisna M (2014) Public-private partnerships: a review
of theory and practice of performance measurement. Int J Prod Perf Man 63(4):499–512
16. Macdonald S, Cheong C (2014) The role of public-private partnerships and the third sector
in con-serving heritage buildings, sites, and historic urban areas. Getty Conservation Institute,
Los Angeles, CA
17. Oppio A, Torrieri F (2016) Supporting public-private partnership for economic and financial
feasibility of urban development. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci 223:62–68
18. Salvo F, De Ruggiero M, Zupi M (2015) The valorization of public real estate. A first outcome
of the experiences in progress and a methodological proposal. XLIII Incontro Di Studi Ce.
SET Sviluppo economico e nuovi rapporti tra agricoltura, territorio e ambiente 67:135–146
19. Tajani F, Morano P, Di Liddo F (2019) Complementarietà dei ruoli dei soggetti coinvolti in
procedure di partenariato pubblico privato per l’efficacia degli interventi e la diversificazione
dei rischi di mercato: analisi di fattibilità di un progetto di valorizzazione nella città di Roma.
Laborest, 18
20. Tajani F, Morano P, Di Liddo F, Locurcio M (2019) An Innovative interpretation of the DCFA
evaluation criteria in the public-private partnership for the enhancement of the public property
assets. In: Calabrò F, Della Spina L, Bevilacqua C (eds) New metropolitan perspectives: local
knowledge and innovation. Smart innovation, systems and technologies, vol 100. Springer,
Berlin, pp 305–313
394 F. Tajani et al.

21. Tajani F, Torre CM, Di Liddo F (2019) Financial feasibility assessment of public property
assets valorization: a case study in Rome (Italy). In: International conference on computational
science and its applications, July 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 82–93
22. Trovato MR, Giuffrida S (2018) The monetary measurement of flood damage and the valuation
of the proactive policies in Sicily. Geosciences 8(4):141
23. www.aterroma.it
24. www.bancaditalia.it
25. Zou PXW, Wang S, Fang D (2008) A life-cycle risk management framework for PPP
infrastructure projects. J Financ Manag Prop Constr 13(2):123–142