IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2887-d341523.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Historical Cloisters and Courtyards as Quiet Areas

Author

Listed:
  • Massimiliano Masullo

    (Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81031 Aversa (CE), Italy)

  • Francesca Castanò

    (Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81031 Aversa (CE), Italy)

  • Roxana Adina Toma

    (Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81031 Aversa (CE), Italy)

  • Luigi Maffei

    (Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81031 Aversa (CE), Italy)

Abstract

Searching for renovating and/or constructing quiet areas in historical urban sites, along with the conservation and valorization policies of the tangible and intangible value of historic urban sites are goals that can be combined into a unique sustainable strategy for the preservation of the sense of place and identity of communities as well as their well-being. Historic cloisters and courtyards are examples of such sites. Due to their physical, architectural, environmental and cultural features, they present restorative capabilities that could qualify them as quite areas. This paper aims to establish a new procedure that, through the exploration and analysis of past and current aspects of these sites, makes it possible to classify them and understand whether they still preserve a restorative character. A graphic representation, obtained from a historical analysis and an objective description of past and current historical/architectural, environmental and cultural scenarios, has been used. The results were compared with those of the Perceived Restorativeness Scale (PRS-11). A diamond shape represents highly restorative sites, while deviations from this shape were found to be weakly correlated with a restorative nature. This has also been shown by the high positive correlation of analytical parameters with the PRS-11 score and, in particular, with the component of Fascination.

Suggested Citation

  • Massimiliano Masullo & Francesca Castanò & Roxana Adina Toma & Luigi Maffei, 2020. "Historical Cloisters and Courtyards as Quiet Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2887-:d:341523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2887/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2887/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Youngeun Kang & Eujin Julia Kim, 2019. "Differences of Restorative Effects While Viewing Urban Landscapes and Green Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, April.
    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. Marina Eirini Stamatiadou & Iordanis Thoidis & Nikolaos Vryzas & Lazaros Vrysis & Charalampos Dimoulas, 2021. "Semantic Crowdsourcing of Soundscapes Heritage: A Mojo Model for Data-Driven Storytelling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Massimiliano Masullo & Asli Ozcevik Bilen & Roxana Adina Toma & Gulsen Akin Guler & Luigi Maffei, 2021. "The Restorativeness of Outdoor Historical Sites in Urban Areas: Physical and Perceptual Correlations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Aggelos Tsaligopoulos & Stella Kyvelou & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi & Aimilia Karapostoli & Chris Economou & Yiannis G. Matsinos, 2021. "Revisiting the Concept of Quietness in the Urban Environment—Towards Ecosystems’ Health and Human Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Hanzheng Lin & Jia-Bing Wang & Xuewei Zhang & Fangbing Hu & Jiang Liu & Xin-Chen Hong, 2024. "Historical sensing: the spatial pattern of soundscape occurrences recorded in poems between the Tang and the Qing Dynasties amid urbanization," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, December.
    5. Alexandru Bogdan & Dorina Chambre & Dana Maria Copolovici & Tudor Bungau & Constantin C. Bungau & Lucian Copolovici, 2022. "Heritage Building Preservation in the Process of Sustainable Urban Development: The Case of Brasov Medieval City, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-21, June.

    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. Chang Li & Yu Yuan & Changan Sun & Minkai Sun, 2022. "The Perceived Restorative Quality of Viewing Various Types of Urban and Rural Scenes: Based on Psychological and Physiological Responses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Yu Wu & Zhixiong Zhuo & Qunyue Liu & Kunyong Yu & Qitang Huang & Jian Liu, 2021. "The Relationships between Perceived Design Intensity, Preference, Restorativeness and Eye Movements in Designed Urban Green Space," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-16, October.
    3. Massimiliano Masullo & Asli Ozcevik Bilen & Roxana Adina Toma & Gulsen Akin Guler & Luigi Maffei, 2021. "The Restorativeness of Outdoor Historical Sites in Urban Areas: Physical and Perceptual Correlations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    4. Yilin Sun & Li Zhu & Jiang Li & Ni Zhang & Yue Tang & Xiaokang Wang & Honglin Wu, 2023. "Study on the Influence and Optimization of Neighborhood Space on the Perceived Restoration of Rural Left-Behind Older People: The Case of Changsha, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-22, September.
    5. Marjan Shayestefar & Mahdieh Pazhouhanfar & Clarine van Oel & Patrik Grahn, 2022. "Exploring the Influence of the Visual Attributes of Kaplan’s Preference Matrix in the Assessment of Urban Parks: A Discrete Choice Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.

    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:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2887-:d:341523. 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.