IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v43y2016i5p871-892.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment

Author

Listed:
  • Luis Loures
  • Thomas Panagopoulos
  • Jon Bryan Burley

Abstract

There is a growing interest in post-industrial landscape redevelopment and public participation in urban planning process. This study examined the public preference on post-industrial land transformation projects. A semi-qualitative methodology was used throughout the application of a questionnaire and interviews. Data on public perception of post-industrial landscape that incorporates significant environmental, cultural and historic assets were collected from 450 residents. Results illustrate that community attitudes to brownfield regeneration projects are positive. Urban growth should consider the redevelopment of derelict and/or abandoned areas instead of consuming new green areas. The results illustrated that, according to public perception, the most important aspect in the redevelopment of the study area is the creation of multifunctional areas, and that this aspect is statistically related with touristic activities, mobility and accessibility, use of renewable energies, environmental education, economic redevelopment, and safety/security. The researchers suggest that coupling the information gathered throughout the public preference process with the intrinsic characteristics of each landscape is helpful in understanding community expectations in order to inform urban regeneration projects that consider the economic, environmental and cultural functions of sites.

Suggested Citation

  • Luis Loures & Thomas Panagopoulos & Jon Bryan Burley, 2016. "Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 871-892, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:43:y:2016:i:5:p:871-892
    DOI: 10.1177/0265813515599981
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265813515599981
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0265813515599981?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Panagopoulos, T., 2009. "Linking forestry, sustainability and aesthetics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2485-2489, August.
    2. Robin Gregory & Tim McDaniels & Daryl Fields, 2001. "Decision Aiding, Not Dispute Resolution: Creating Insights through Structured Environmental Decisions," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 415-432.
    3. Mirjam de Groot & Madelinde H. Winnubst & Nienke van Schie & Jacko A. van Ast, 2014. "Visioning with the Public: Incorporating Public Values in Landscape Planning," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(6), pages 1165-1181, June.
    4. Konisky, David & Beierle, Thomas, 1999. "Public Participation in Environmental Planning in the Great Lakes Region," RFF Working Paper Series dp-99-50, Resources for the Future.
    5. Paul Lawless, 2013. "Reconciling "Bottom-Up" Perspectives with "Top-Down" Change Data in Evaluating Area Regeneration Schemes," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(10), pages 1562-1577, October.
    6. Beierle, Thomas C. & Konisky, David M., 1999. "Public Participation in Environmental Planning in the Great Lakes Region," Discussion Papers 10578, Resources for the Future.
    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. Chiara Cocco & Christian Rezende Freitas & Ana Clara Mourão Moura & Michele Campagna, 2019. "Geodesign Process Analytics: Focus on Design as a Process and Its Outcomes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Juan Claver & Amabel García-Domínguez & Miguel A. Sebastián, 2020. "Multicriteria Decision Tool for Sustainable Reuse of Industrial Heritage into Its Urban and Social Environment. Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-25, September.
    3. Xu, Haiyun & Meng, Miao & Zhu, Fangyu & Ding, Qi, 2024. "The role of local officials in promoting public participation during local urban planning processes: Evidence from Chinese cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    4. Fuyuan Wang & Rundong Feng, 2021. "Spatial Coupling and Causal Effects between the Recreational Use of Ecological Land and Restoration: A Case Study of the Pearl River Delta Urban Agglomeration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Agnieszka Zwirowicz-Rutkowska & Joanna Nowak Da Costa & Andrzej Muczyński, 2023. "Managing Health Concerns Related to Post-Industrial Sites Redevelopment: A Warsaw, Poland Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(14), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Zhipeng Zhu & Guangyu Wang & Jianwen Dong, 2019. "Correlation Analysis between Land Use/Cover Change and Air Pollutants—A Case Study in Wuyishan City," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-15, July.
    7. Manuel Ayala & Diego Huaraca & José Varela-Aldás & Andrea Ordóñez & Genís Riba, 2020. "Anthropization and Growth of the Electricity Grid as Variables for the Analysis of Urban Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Nyuying Wang & Oleg Golubchikov & Wei Chen & Zhigao Liu, 2020. "The Hybrid Spatialities of Post-Industrial Beijing: Communism, Neoliberalism, and Brownfield Redevelopment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    9. Dejana Nedučin & Milena Krklješ, 2022. "Culture-Led Regeneration of Industrial Brownfield Hosting Temporary Uses: A Post-Socialist Context–Case Study from Novi Sad, Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-26, December.
    10. Navratil, Josef & Picha, Kamil & Martinat, Stanislav & Nathanail, Paul C. & Tureckova, Kamila & Holesinska, Andrea, 2018. "Resident’s preferences for urban brownfield revitalization: Insights from two Czech cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 224-234.
    11. Rui Alexandre Castanho, 2019. "Identifying Processes of Smart Planning, Governance and Management in European Border Cities. Learning from City-to-City Cooperation (C2C)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Sérgio Lousada & José Cabezas & Rui Alexandre Castanho & José Manuel Naranjo Gómez, 2022. "Land-Use Changes in Insular Urban Territories: A Retrospective Analysis from 1990 to 2018. The Case of Madeira Island—Ribeira Brava," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Naveed Ahmad & Yuming Zhu & Muhammad Ibrahim & Muhammad Waqas & Abdul Waheed, 2018. "Development of a Standard Brownfield Definition, Guidelines, and Evaluation Index System for Brownfield Redevelopment in Developing Countries: The Case of Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    14. Luís Loures & Alejandro Chamizo & Paulo Ferreira & Ana Loures & Rui Castanho & Thomas Panagopoulos, 2020. "Assessing the Effectiveness of Precision Agriculture Management Systems in Mediterranean Small Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, May.
    15. Rui Alexandre Castanho & José Manuel Naranjo Gómez & Gualter Couto & Pedro Pimentel & Áurea Sousa & Maria da Graça Batista, 2021. "Analyzing the Patterns, Trends and Dynamics of the Land-Use Changes in Azores Region: From 1990 to 2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, May.
    16. Rui Alexandre Castanho & Luís Loures & José Cabezas & Luis Fernández-Pozo, 2017. "Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) in Southern Europe—An Iberian Case Study. The Eurocity Elvas-Badajoz," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-16, March.

    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. Thomas C. Beierle & David M. Konisky, 2000. "Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 587-602.
    2. William D. Leach & Neil W. Pelkey & Paul A. Sabatier, 2002. "Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 645-670.
    3. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    4. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    6. B. M. Kellett & R. I. Beilin & K. L. Bristow & G. Moore & F. H. S. Chiew, 2007. "Reflecting on stakeholders’ perceptions in an Ecological Risk Assessment workshop: Lessons for practitioners," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 109-117, March.
    7. Vassiliki Vlami & Stamatis Zogaris & Hakan Djuma & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2019. "A Field Method for Landscape Conservation Surveying: The Landscape Assessment Protocol (LAP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Riyadh Mundher & Shamsul Abu Bakar & Suhardi Maulan & Mohd Johari Mohd Yusof & Syuhaily Osman & Ammar Al-Sharaa & Hangyu Gao, 2022. "Exploring Awareness and Public Perception towards the Importance of Visual Aesthetics for Preservation of Permanent Forest Reserve (PFR) in Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.
    9. I. Linkov & F. K. Satterstrom & G. Kiker & T. P. Seager & T. Bridges & K. H. Gardner & S. H. Rogers & D. A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 61-78, February.
    10. Korobeinikov, A. & Read, P. & Parshotam, A. & Lermit, J., 2010. "Modelling regional markets for co-produced timber and biofuel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 553-561, January.
    11. Failing, L. & Gregory, R. & Harstone, M., 2007. "Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: A decision-focused approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 47-60, October.
    12. Laura Ogden, 2006. "Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South Florida," Post-Print hal-01201128, HAL.
    13. Scodanibbio, Lucia, 2011. "Opening a policy window for organisational change and full-cost accounting: The creation of BC Hydro's water use planning program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 1006-1015, March.
    14. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    15. Alicia López-Rodríguez & Verónica Hernández-Jiménez, 2022. "Sustainable Forest, Beautiful Forest, Well-Managed Forest: Attitudes towards Land Management and Their Influence on the Perception of a Mediterranean Agroforestry Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    16. repec:sae:envval:v:11:y:2002:i:4:p:461-488 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Thomas C Beierle & David M Konisky, 2001. "What are we Gaining from Stakeholder Involvement? Observations from Environmental Planning in the Great Lakes," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 515-527, August.
    18. Ogden, Laura, 2003. "Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South FloridaPublic participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoratio," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 80.
    19. Laura Ogden, 2006. "Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South Florida," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 80, pages 53-73.
    20. Mikael Klintman, 2009. "Participation in Green Consumer Policies: Deliberative Democracy under Wrong Conditions?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 43-57, March.
    21. Timothy McDaniels, 2021. "Four Decades of Transformation in Decision Analytic Practice for Societal Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 491-502, March.

    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:sae:envirb:v:43:y:2016:i:5:p:871-892. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.