Go to the content. | Move to the navigation | Go to the site search | Go to the menu | Contacts | Accessibility

| Create Account

Martin, Chiara (2008) Efficienza economica e conservazione dei sistemi naturali nell'allocazione della risorsa suolo tra usi alternativi: un modello multicriteriale di aiuto alle decisioni nella pianificazione territoriale sostenibile. [Ph.D. thesis]

Full text disponibile come:

[img]Other
1322Kb
[img]Documento PDF
1322Kb

Abstract (english)

The thesis focuses on valuation in land use allocation, dealing with the problem of determining the optimal choice among alternatives in land planning. The aim of the thesis is double. In fact, on the one hand, the role of valuation in planning activities is investigated, in the light of sustainable development concept; on the other and, an original decision aiding methodology is proposed, which can be used by planners to select an optimal land use plan that balances the socioeconomic benefits and environmental impacts.
The thesis is divided in two parts: the first part focuses on sustainability and planning concepts, deepening the role of valuation in sustainability assessment of land use plans; the second part shows the methodology proposed.
The first part is made up by three chapters. The first chapter enters the concepts of sustainability and natural capital, and the debate on economic growth (expansionistic versus ecological paradigm). In the second chapter, the relationship between valuation and planning process, its development in the course of time, and the development of new valuation methods for sustainability assessment in planning are investigated. The most diffused approaches are illustrated: the cost-benefit approach, the multi-criteria evaluation, and the new "landscape approach". In the third chapter, methods for natural capital assessment are presented, from both economic and ecological point of view. For each one of these two approaches, the concept of value, valuation methods and applicability are analysed.

The second part of the thesis presents a method that can be used by planners to select an optimal land use plan among alternatives. The method focuses on spatial dimension of economic activities and of ecosystems conservation. The model has a multicriteria structure, based on two objectives: economic efficiency and ecosystems conservation (that are contrasting elements of sustainable development). In the fourth chapter the framework of the model is illustrated, and its application in planning processes is explained. The fifth, and last, chapter presents the parameters used in the model to quantify the two objectives: Economic Index and Quality Index. The Economic Index measures the economic efficiency of a certain landascape structure (proposed by a land use plan), while the Quality Index quantify landscape structure ability to protect natural systems. These indexes are constructed referring to principles and instruments of specific disciplines: respectively, Regional Economy, which affects the relationship between land use and economic efficiency, and Landscape Ecology, which investigates the relationship between land use and ecosystems health.
Conclusions summarize thesis contents and highlight difficulties and further research possibilities.


Statistiche Download - Aggiungi a RefWorks
EPrint type:Ph.D. thesis
Tutor:Stellin, Giuseppe
Ph.D. course:Ciclo 20 > Scuole per il 20simo ciclo > INGEGNERIA GESTIONALE ED ESTIMO > ESTIMO ED ECONOMIA TERRITORIALE
Data di deposito della tesi:2008
Anno di Pubblicazione:2008
Key Words:pianificazione; analisi multicriteriale; sostenibilità 
Settori scientifico-disciplinari MIUR:Area 08 - Ingegneria civile e Architettura > ICAR/22 Estimo
Struttura di riferimento:Dipartimenti > pre 2012 - Dipartimento di Innovazione Meccanica e Gestionale
Codice ID:333
Depositato il:29 Oct 2008
Simple Metadata
Full Metadata
EndNote Format

Bibliografia

I riferimenti della bibliografia possono essere cercati con Cerca la citazione di AIRE, copiando il titolo dell'articolo (o del libro) e la rivista (se presente) nei campi appositi di "Cerca la Citazione di AIRE".
Le url contenute in alcuni riferimenti sono raggiungibili cliccando sul link alla fine della citazione (Vai!) e tramite Google (Ricerca con Google). Il risultato dipende dalla formattazione della citazione.

1. Alcamo J. et al., 2003. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment-Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: a Framework for Assessment, Island Press, Washington. Cerca con Google

2. Aronson J., Blignaut J., Milton S. and Clewell A., 2006. Natural capital: The limiting factor. Ecological Engineering 28, 1-5. Cerca con Google

3. Arrow K.J., Debreu G., 1954. Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy, Econometrica 22, 265-290 Cerca con Google

4. Basiago A.D., 1995. Methods of defining 'Sustainability'', Sustainable Development 3, 109-119. Cerca con Google

5. Bastianoni S., Marchettini N., Tiezzi E., 2000. Indicatori di sostenibilità ambientale, in Il monitoraggio ambientale ( a cura di N. Cardellicchio e S. Cavalli), Nuova Poligrafica Milanese, Milano, 253-268. Cerca con Google

6. Bateman I.J., Carson R.T., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Ozdemiroglu E., Pearce D.W., Sugden R., Swanson J., Economic Valuation with Stated Preference techniques, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK-Northampton, MA, USA, 2002. Cerca con Google

7. Bateman I. J., Willis K.G., 1999. Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Cerca con Google

8. Beinat E., 1997. Value functions for environmental management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Cerca con Google

9. Bishop R.C., 1993. Economic efficiency, sustainability and biodiversity, Ambio 22, 69-73. Cerca con Google

10. Bishop R.C., Romano D., Environmental Resource Valuation: Applications of the Contingent Valuation Method in Italy, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, 1998 Cerca con Google

11. Blaschke T., 2006. The role of the spatial dimension within the framework of sustainable landscapes and natural capital, Landscape and Urban Planning 75, 198-226. Cerca con Google

12. Camagni R., 1992. Economia urbana. Principi e modelli teorici. La Nuova Italia Scientifica, Roma. Cerca con Google

13. Capello R., 2004. Economia regionale. Il Mulino, Bologna. Cerca con Google

14. CBD-Convention on biological biodiversity, 2001. Biodiversity global outlook, www.biodiv.org. Vai! Cerca con Google

15. Cleveland C.J., Ruth M., 1997. When, where, and by how much do biophysical limits constrain the economic process? A survey of Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen's contribution to ecological economics, Ecological Economics 22, 203-223. Cerca con Google

16. Common M., Perrings C., 1992. Towards an ecological economics of sustainability, Ecological Economics 6, 7-34. Cerca con Google

17. Costanza, R., D'Arge, R., de Groot, R.S., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R., Sutton, P. and Van den Belt, M., 1997. The value of the worldìs ecosystem services and natural capital, Nature 387, 253-260. Cerca con Google

18. Costanza R., 2003. Social goals and the evaluation of natural capital, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 86, 19-28. Cerca con Google

19. Costanza R., Daly H.E., 1992. Natural Capital and Sustainable Development, Conservation Biology 6, 37-46. Cerca con Google

20. Daly H.E., 1987. The Economic Growth Debate: What Some Economists Have Learned But Many Have Not, Journal of environmental economics and management, 14, 323-336. Cerca con Google

21. Daly H.E., 1990. Toward some operational principles of sustainable development, Ecological Economics 2, 1-6 Cerca con Google

22. Daly H.E., 1996. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Bacon Press, Boston. Cerca con Google

23. Daly H.E., 1997. Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz, Ecological Economics 22, 261-266. Cerca con Google

24. De Groot, R.S., 1992. Functions of Nature: Evaluation of Nature in Environmental Planning, Management and Decision Making. Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen. Cerca con Google

25. De Groot, R.S., 1994. Environmental functions and the economic value of natural ecosystems. In: A. Jansson, M. Hammer, C. Folke and R. Costanza (Ed.), Investing in Natural Capital: the Ecological Economics Approach to Sustainability, Island Press, Washington, pp. 151-168. Cerca con Google

26. De Groot, R.S., 2005. Function analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes, Landscape and Urban Planning 75, 175-186. Cerca con Google

27. De Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A. e Boumans, R.M.J., 2002. A typology for the classification, descriptions and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services, Ecological. Economics 41, 393-408. Cerca con Google

28. DeFries R.S., Foley J.A., Asner G. P., 2004. Land-use choices: balancing human needs and ecosystem function, Frontiers in ecology and the environment 2, 249-257. Cerca con Google

29. Dokmeci V.F., Cagdas G. e Tokcan S., 1993. Multiobjective Land-use planning model, Journal of Urban Planning and Developmen 119, 15-23. Cerca con Google

30. England R.W., 2000. Natural capital and the theory of economic growth, Ecological Economics 34, 425-431. Cerca con Google

31. Farber S.C., Costanza, R., Wilson, M.A., 2002. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services, Ecological. Economics 41, 375-392. Cerca con Google

32. Farina A., 2006. Principles and methods in Landscape Ecology: towards a science of the landscape, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Cerca con Google

33. Farley J., Daly H., 2006. Natural capital: The limiting factor. A replay to Aronson, Blignaut, Milton and Clewell, Ecological Engineering 28, 6-10. Cerca con Google

34. Faucheux S., Muir E., O'Connor M., 1997. Neoclassical natural capital theory and «weak» indicators for sustainability, Land Economics 73, 528-552. Cerca con Google

35. Fenech A., Foster J., Hamilton K., Hansell R., 2003. Natural capital in ecology and economics: an overview, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 86, 3-17. Cerca con Google

36. Forman, R.T.T. (1995), Land Mosaic. The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions, Cambridge University Press. Cerca con Google

37. Freeman A.M., 2003. The measurement of Environmental and Resource Values, Resource for the Future, Washington. Cerca con Google

38. Fukuyama F., 1995. Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. NY: Free Press. Cerca con Google

39. Fusco Girard L., Nijkamp P., Le valutazioni per lo sviluppo sostenibile della città e del territorio, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1997. Cerca con Google

40. Georgescu-Roegen N., 1979. Energy analysis and economic valuation Cerca con Google

41. Gios G., Notaro S., La valutazione economica dei beni ambientali: introduzione al metodo della valutazione contingente, CEDAM, Padova, 2001. Cerca con Google

42. Gomez-Sal A., Belmontes J.A., Nicolau J.M., 2003. Assessing landscape values: a proposal for a multidimensional conceptual model, Ecological Modelling 168, 319-341. Cerca con Google

43. Gunderson L.H., 2000. Ecological resilience in theory and application, Annual Review of ecological systems 31, 425-439. Cerca con Google

44. Gunderson L.H., Holling C.S., 2002. Panarchy, Whasington, D.C., Island Press. Cerca con Google

45. Gustafson E. J. 1998. Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: What is the state of the art, Ecosystems 1, 143-156. Cerca con Google

46. Haber W., 2004. Landscape ecology as a bridge from ecosystems to human ecology, Ecological Research 19, 99-106. Cerca con Google

47. Haines-Young R., 2000. Sustainable development and sustainable landscapes: defining a new paradigm for landscape ecology, Fennia 178, 7-14. Cerca con Google

48. Hartwick J.M., 1977. Intergenerational equity and the investing of rents from exhaustible resources, American Economic Review 67, 972-974. Cerca con Google

49. Heal G., 2000. Valuing ecosystem services, Ecosystems 3, 24-30. Cerca con Google

50. Holling C.S., 2001. Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological and social systems, Ecosystems 4, 390-405. Cerca con Google

51. Howarth R.B., Farber S., 2002. Accounting for the value of ecosystem services, Ecological Economics 41, 421-429. Cerca con Google

52. Ingram D.R., 1971. The concept of accessibility: a search for an operational form, Regional Studies 5, 101-107. Cerca con Google

53. Jorgensen S.E., Bendoricchio G., 2001. Fundamentals of ecological modelling, Elsevier, Amsterdam. Cerca con Google

54. Keeney R.L., Raiffa H., 1976. Multiple criteria decision making, Wiley, New York. Cerca con Google

55. Klauer B., 2000. Ecosystem prices: activity analysis applied to ecosystems, Ecological Economics 33, 473-486. Cerca con Google

56. Koopmans T.C., 1951. The analysis of production as an efficient combination of activities, in: Koopmans T.C (Ed.), Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, Wiley, New York. Cerca con Google

57. Kopp R. J., V. K. Smith, 1993. Valuing Natural Assets: The Economics of Natural Resource Damage Assessment. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. Cerca con Google

58. Leitao B.A., Miller J., Ahern J., McGarigal K., 2006. Measuring landscapes. A planner's handbook, Island Press, Whasington. Cerca con Google

59. Levin S.A., 1998. Ecosystems and the Biosphere as Complex Adaptive Systems, Ecosystems 1, 431-436. Cerca con Google

60. Limburg K.E., O'Neill R.V., Costanza R., Farber S., 2002. Complex systems and valuation, Ecological Economics 41, 409-420. Cerca con Google

61. Lombardi P., Micelli E. (a cura di), 1999. Le misure del piano. Temi e strumenti della valutazione nei nuovi piani, Franco Angeli, Milano. Cerca con Google

62. Ludwig D., 2000. Limitations of economic valuation of ecosystems, Ecosystems 3, 31-35. Cerca con Google

63. Ly H., Reynolds J.F., 1994. A simulation experiment to quantify spatial heterogeneity in categorical maps, Ecology 75, 2246-2255. Cerca con Google

64. Makrí, M.B., 2001. Accessibility Indices: A Tool for Comprehensive Land-Use Planning. Division of Traffic Planning, LTH. Cerca con Google

65. Malinvaud F., 1953. Capital accumulation and efficient allocation of resources, Econometrica 21, 233-286. Cerca con Google

66. Marchi G., Lenti L. (a cura di ). La valutazione nei processi di piano. Strumenti complessi di trasformazione urbana, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2003. Cerca con Google

67. Matthews R., Selman P., 2006. Landscape as a focus for integrating human and environmental processes, Journal of Agricultural Economics 57, 199-212. Cerca con Google

68. Mcgarigal K., Marks B.J., 1994. Fragstats. Spatial patterns analysyis program for quantifying landscape structure. Cerca con Google

69. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA), Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, Island Press, Washington, DC & Covelo, CA (2005). Cerca con Google

70. Mitchell R. C., R. T. Carson. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. Cerca con Google

71. Munda G., Nijkamp P., Rietveld P., 1994. Qualitative multicriteria evaluation for environmental management, Ecological Economics 10, 97-112. Cerca con Google

72. Nijkamp P., Rietveld P., Voogd N., 1990. Multicriteria evaluation in physical planning, North-Holland, Netherlands. Cerca con Google

73. Nunes, P.A.L.D., van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Nijkamp, P.,2003. The Ecological Economics of Biodiversity: methods and policy applications. Edward Elgar, Northampton, USA. Cerca con Google

74. Odum H.T., 1996. Environmental accounting: Emergy and Environmental decision making, Wiley. Cerca con Google

75. Page T., 1977. Conservation and Economic Efficiency: an approach to materials policy, Resources for the Future/Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. Cerca con Google

76. Paoletti M.G., 1999. Using bioindicators based on biodiversity to assess landscape sustainability, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 74, 1-18. Cerca con Google

77. Patterson M.G., 2002. Ecological production based pricing of biosphere process, Ecological Economics 41, 457-478. Cerca con Google

78. Pearce D., Atkinson G., Mourato S. Cost-benefit analysis and the environment, OECD Publishing, Parigi, 2006. Cerca con Google

79. Perman R., Ma Y., McGilvray J., Common M. Natural resource and Environmental Economics, Pearson Education Limited, Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex, 2003. Cerca con Google

80. Pezzy J, 1992. Sustainable Development Concepts:An Economic Analysis, World Bank Environment Paper 2 (WashingtonDC: World Bank). Cerca con Google

81. Pope J., Annandale D., Morrison-Saunders A., 2004. Conceptualizing sustainability assessment, Environmental impact assessment review 24, 595-616. Cerca con Google

82. Prato T., 2007. Evaluating land use plans under uncertainty, Land Use Policy24, 165-174. Cerca con Google

83. Rees W.E., 2003. Economic development and environmental protection: an ecological economics perspective, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 86, 29-45. Cerca con Google

84. Rietveld P., Rodenburg C.A., 2003. Multifunctional land use: an accessibility interpretation, ERSA. Cerca con Google

85. Rodriguez J.P., Beard T.Jr., Bennett E., Cumming G.S, Cork S., Agard J., Dobson A.P., Peterson G.D., 2006. Trade-offs across Space, Time, and Ecosystem Services, Ecology and Society 11:28. Cerca con Google

86. Scandurra E., 1995. L'ambiente dell'uomo. Verso il progetto della città sostenibile, Etas. Cerca con Google

87. Sciencemen D.M., 1987. Energy and Emergy, in G. Pillet and T. Murota (eds), Environmental Economics: The Analysis of a Major Interface. Ginevra: R. Leimgruber, 257-276. Cerca con Google

88. Salem Chakhar and Vincent Mousseau, An algebra for multicriteria spatial modeling, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 572-596, 2007. Cerca con Google

89. Stagl, S., 2004. Valuation for Sustainable Development-The Role of Multicriteria Evaluation, Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung 73 , 1, 53-62. Cerca con Google

90. Stanghellini S. (a cura di), 1996. Valutazione e processo di piano, Alinea, Firenze. Cerca con Google

91. Termorshuizen J.W., Opdam P., Van Den Brink A., 2007. Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning, Landscape and urban planning 79, 374-384. Cerca con Google

92. Turner M.G., 1989. Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process, Annual review of Ecology and Systematic 20, 171-197. Cerca con Google

93. Turner M.G., Gardner R.H., 1991. Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. Sprinter, New York. Cerca con Google

94. Wiggering H, Dalchowa C., Glemnitz M., Helming C., Müller K., Schultz A., Stachowa U. e Zander P., 2006. Indicators for multifunctional land use - Linking socioeconomic requirements with landscape potentials, Ecological Indicators 6, 238-249. Cerca con Google

95. Winkler R., 2006. Valuation of ecosystem goods and services. An integrated dynamic approach, Ecological Economics 59, 82-93. Cerca con Google

96. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development), Our Common Future. Oxford University Press and United Nations, New York, 1987. Cerca con Google

97. Venturelli R.C., Galli A., 2006. Integrated indicators in environmental planning: methodological considerations and applications, Ecological Indicators 6, 228-237. Cerca con Google

98. Direttiva 2001/42/CE del Parlamento Europeo e del Consiglio del 27 giugno 2001, "Valutazione degli effetti di determinati piani e programmi sull'ambiente". Cerca con Google

99. Proposta di legge n. 2319 del 2 marzo 2007, "Principi fondamentali per il governo del territorio. Delega al Governo in materia di fiscalità urbanistica e immobiliare." Cerca con Google

100. Legge n. 1150 del 17 agosto 1942, "Legge urbanistica". Cerca con Google

Download statistics

Solo per lo Staff dell Archivio: Modifica questo record