IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4189-d182685.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Methodological Framework for Assessing Practicability of the Urban Space: The Survey on Conditions of Practicable Environments (SCOPE) Procedure Applied in the Case Study of Cagliari (Italy)

Author

Listed:
  • Chiara Garau

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

  • Alfonso Annunziata

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

  • Mauro Coni

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

Abstract

Children’s independent activities within public spaces emerge as a fundamental condition for their development considered in the context of their needs: socialization, movement, autonomy, and enrichment of their creative, imaginative, and cognitive potential. The promotion of their independence represents a relevant issue for implementing the smart city paradigm. This paradigm calls for a methodological framework where the urban fabric’s performance is evaluated via comprehensive analytic protocols. The proposed study presents an audit tool for evaluating the quality of urban spaces in terms of their practicability by children: the Survey on Conditions of Practicable Environments (SCOPE). The practicability of this research is establishing the quality of urban spaces’ usability, and it is expressed in terms of compositional, configurational, functional, and social factors of the built environment organized within a framework articulated in seven key dimensions (connectivity, convenience, comfort, commitment, conviviality, conspicuousness, and coexistence). The introduction of the concept of practicability and of indicators incorporating the demand for a children-sensitive perspective in the project of public spaces determine the novelty of the SCOPE procedure. This methodology was applied to an area in Central Cagliari, Italy, to evaluate the usability of public spaces. The results reveal that the proposed methodology is relevant for implementing the smart city paradigm because it addresses children’s autonomy and their rights to the city by selecting and defining indicators to clarify and assess conditions of the built environment conducive to children’s autonomy and independent social activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Chiara Garau & Alfonso Annunziata & Mauro Coni, 2018. "A Methodological Framework for Assessing Practicability of the Urban Space: The Survey on Conditions of Practicable Environments (SCOPE) Procedure Applied in the Case Study of Cagliari (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4189-:d:182685
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4189/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4189/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mona Jabbari & Fernando Fonseca & Rui Ramos, 2018. "Combining multi-criteria and space syntax analysis to assess a pedestrian network: the case of Oporto," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 23-41, January.
    2. Sharmin, Samia & Kamruzzaman, Md., 2017. "Association between the built environment and children's independent mobility: A meta-analytic review," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 104-117.
    3. Battista, Geoffrey A. & Manaugh, Kevin, 2018. "Stores and mores: Toward socializing walkability," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 53-60.
    4. repec:mpr:mprres:4954 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Chiara Garau & Valentina Maria Pavan, 2018. "Evaluating Urban Quality: Indicators and Assessment Tools for Smart Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Regine Gerike & Caroline Koszowski & Bettina Schröter & Ralph Buehler & Paul Schepers & Johannes Weber & Rico Wittwer & Peter Jones, 2021. "Built Environment Determinants of Pedestrian Activities and Their Consideration in Urban Street Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Chiara Garau & Alfonso Annunziata & Claudia Yamu, 2020. "The Multi-Method Tool ‘PAST’ for Evaluating Cultural Routes in Historical Cities: Evidence from Cagliari, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    3. Chiara Garau & Alfonso Annunziata, 2020. "Supporting Children’s Independent Activities in Smart and Playable Public Places," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Chiara Garau & Alfonso Annunziata, 2019. "Smart City Governance and Children’s Agency: An Assessment of the Green Infrastructure Impact on Children’s Activities in Cagliari (Italy) with the Tool “Opportunities for Children in Urban Spaces (OC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chiara Garau & Alfonso Annunziata, 2019. "Smart City Governance and Children’s Agency: An Assessment of the Green Infrastructure Impact on Children’s Activities in Cagliari (Italy) with the Tool “Opportunities for Children in Urban Spaces (OC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Fernando Fonseca & Escolástica Fernandes & Rui Ramos, 2022. "Walkable Cities: Using the Smart Pedestrian Net Method for Evaluating a Pedestrian Network in Guimarães, Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.
    3. Isabel Marzi & Anne Kerstin Reimers, 2018. "Children’s Independent Mobility: Current Knowledge, Future Directions, and Public Health Implications," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Ying Zhou & Weiwei Li & Pingtao Yi & Chengju Gong, 2019. "Evaluation of City Sustainability from the Perspective of Behavioral Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-17, November.
    5. André Luis Azevedo Guedes & Jeferson Carvalho Alvarenga & Maurício Dos Santos Sgarbi Goulart & Martius Vicente Rodriguez y Rodriguez & Carlos Alberto Pereira Soares, 2018. "Smart Cities: The Main Drivers for Increasing the Intelligence of Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Marcin Janusz & Marcin Kowalczyk, 2022. "How Smart Are V4 Cities? Evidence from the Multidimensional Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    7. Sebastiano Carbonara & Marco Faustoferri & Davide Stefano, 2021. "Real Estate Values and Urban Quality: A Multiple Linear Regression Model for Defining an Urban Quality Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Karolina Dudzic-Gyurkovich, 2023. "Study of Centrality Measures in the Network of Green Spaces in the City of Krakow," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-30, September.
    9. Rémy Le Boennec & Sterenn Lucas, 2020. "Does a positive density perception increase the probability of living in the ideal housing type? Evidence from the Loire-Atlantique Département in France," Working Papers hal-02441513, HAL.
    10. Aleksandra Jadach-Sepioło & Katarzyna Olejniczak-Szuster & Michał Dziadkiewicz, 2021. "Does Environment Matter in Smart Revitalization Strategies? Management towards Sustainable Urban Regeneration Programs in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    11. Jia Zhao & Wei Su & Jiancheng Luo & Jin Zuo, 2021. "Evaluation and Optimization of Walkability of Children’s School Travel Road for Accessibility and Safety Improvement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-19, December.
    12. Marco Trolese & Francesco De Fabiis & Pierluigi Coppola, 2023. "A Walkability Index including Pedestrians’ Perception of Built Environment: The Case Study of Milano Rogoredo Station," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-14, October.
    13. Massingue, Suzanna Allen & Oviedo, Daniel, 2021. "Walkability and the Right to the city: A snapshot critique of pedestrian space in Maputo, Mozambique," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    14. Sharmin, Samia & Kamruzzaman, Md. & Haque, Md Mazharul, 2020. "The impact of topological properties of built environment on children independent mobility: A comparative study between discretionary vs. nondiscretionary trips in Dhaka," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    15. Mona Jabbari & Zahra Ahmadi & Rui Ramos, 2022. "Defining a Digital System for the Pedestrian Network as a Conceptual Implementation Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-11, February.
    16. Pablo Sáinz-Ruiz & José Ramón Martínez-Riera, 2022. "Community Assets for Health Model and Assessment Scale: A Delphi-Based Analysis and Expert Validation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-19, October.
    17. Shilpi Mittal & Jayprakash Chadchan & Sudipta K. Mishra, 2020. "Review of Concepts, Tools and Indices for the Assessment of Urban Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 187-214, May.
    18. Scheiner, Joachim & Huber, Oliver & Lohmüller, Stefan, 2019. "Children's independent travel to and from primary school: Evidence from a suburban town in Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 116-131.
    19. Liu Yang & Koen H. van Dam & Lufeng Zhang, 2020. "Developing Goals and Indicators for the Design of Sustainable and Integrated Transport Infrastructure and Urban Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-34, November.
    20. Fabrizio Battisti & Orazio Campo, 2021. "The Assessment of Density Bonus in Building Renovation Interventions. The Case of the City of Florence in Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4189-:d:182685. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.