sustainability-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Exploring Transformative Approaches to Contemporary Territorial Challenges: Between Advocacy, Coproduction and Entrepreneurial Approaches

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050). This special issue belongs to the section "Sustainable Urban and Rural Development".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 February 2024) | Viewed by 5758

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth (IRCrES), Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Moncalieri, Italy
Interests: social innovation; territorial development; place-based; energy community; urban policy; social economy
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Civil, Constructional and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
Interests: advocacy planning; urban planning; planning theory; housing studies; urban policy

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Architecture and Arts, Università Iuav di Venezia, Dorsoduro 2206, 30123 Venezia, Italy
Interests: real estate economics; urban studies; land use policy; real estate valuation

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The COVID-19 pandemic and energy crisis have presented social challenges in European cities and regions that require attention at multiple levels. It is widely acknowledged that these challenges must be addressed at the local level (Brenner, 2019), where community relationships can provide a more nuanced understanding of the issues and opportunities (Cellamare, 2008). The pandemic has emphasised the need for more resilient, sustainable, and equitable cities, as long-distance mobility-based urban development models have been shown to be ineffective, revealing widespread inequalities across cities and regions (Florida et al., 2021; Moreno et al., 2021; Tricarico and De Vidovich, 2021). The energy and geopolitical crisis highlight the need for a transition towards a decentralised infrastructure that can mitigate the effects of climate change and their impact on the vulnerability of cities and territories (Moroni and Tricarico, 2018). To achieve this, a transition towards more democratic governance of urban dynamics is required, with a focus on fostering closer community connections, increasing social capital, promoting social integration, and reducing reliance on unsustainable development models (Pelling, 2012). Failure to meet these demands and ignoring the context risks exacerbating the "geography of discontent," leading to the loss of trust in national and supranational institutions and traditional political parties (Dijkstra et al., 2020), and the rise of radical, intolerant, and populist political positions.

Cities are responding to these challenges by exploring new ways of increasing their "social innovation factor" to reduce the distance between centres and margins through transformative economic, social, and political empowerment practices. Social innovation approaches and bottom-up initiatives can provide valuable insights into new units of analysis and organisational phenomena and suggest new ways of framing the urgent social challenges that traditional top–down regional development policy or zoning planning often ignore or tackle with poor results (Barone and De Blasio, 2022).

The purpose of this Special Issue is to collect state-of-the-art research that examines these new urban realities and explores the themes of advocacy, co-production and entrepreneurial initiatives connected to social innovation and transformative economies (Tricarico et al., 2022 A; LabSU DICEA and Fairwatch, 2023). In particular, we are seeking contributions that focus on three critical issues:

  1. Local advocacy groups in marginal areas: Analysing the role of community-based formal and informal organisations in claiming for power through self-organisations in education, cultural, local welfare, and co-housing activities to improve life conditions in marginalised areas, such as peripheries or inner cities. By exploring and highlighting the experiences of local advocacy groups, research contributions in this field can provide valuable information about alternative forms of urban governance that prioritise the needs of local communities, with far-reaching implications for urban planning and policy (Swyngedouw et al., 2002; Cellamare, 2020; Beveridge and Koch, 2022)
  2. Urban regeneration initiatives led by place-based institutional schemes: This section will examine co-production in urban regeneration initiatives, where community-based organisations and local coalitions works in collaboration with public administration and/or within the framework of national policy, experimenting community engagement practices and/or participatory urban design processes, delivering a multi-layered governance scheme able to meet different stakeholders interests  (Mangialardo and Micelli, 2018, 2021). We also look at contributions focusing on the analysis of effective governance processes among stakeholders formalised through partnerships and collaborative networks that allow for a more integrated and holistic approach to urban asset strategic management (Tricarico et al., 2022 B).
  3. Open social innovation programs: This section welcomes contributions that explore the role of innovation ecosystems and R&D investment policies in promoting local businesses and entrepreneurial solutions for local sustainability challenges (Tricarico et al., 2021). These solutions often embody a unique combination of local knowledge, resources, and creativity, and their effectiveness in addressing sustainability challenges can be a valuable source of insight for policymakers, financial actors, and practitioners alike. In particular, we are interested in place-based impact economy initiatives to foster new social innovation opportunities. This may include case studies of specific initiatives, comparative analysis of different approaches, and assessments of the effectiveness of various policies and programs aimed at promoting both technological innovation and social impact (Chesbrough and Da Minin, 2014).

References:

  • Barone, G. and Blasio, G.de (2023) Place-based policies in the Italian case, part 1: A lot of money for little or no growth, CEPR. Available at: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/place-based-policies-italian-case-part-1-lot-money-little-or-no-growth (Accessed: February 7, 2023).
  • Beveridge R., Koch P. (2022), How Cities Can Transform Democracy, Polity Press, London
  • Brenner, N. (2019). New urban spaces: Urban theory and the scale question. Oxford University Press.
  • Cellamare, C. (2020). Città fai-da-te: tra antagonismo e cittadinanza. Storie di autorganizzazione urbana. Donzelli Editore.
  • Cellamare, C. (2008). Fare città: pratiche urbane e storie di luoghi. Milan: Elèuthera.
  • Chesbrough, H. and Di Minin, A. (2014) Open social innovation. New frontiers in open innovation. In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., and West, J. (eds.), New Frontiers in Open Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 169– 187.
  • Dijkstra, L., Poelman, H., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2020). The geography of EU discontent. Regional Studies, 54(6), 737-753.
  • Florida, R., Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Storper, M. (2021). Cities in a post-COVID world. Urban Studies, 00420980211018072.
  • LabSU DICEA, Fairwatch (2023). Reti di Mutualismo e poli civici a Roma. Osservatorio delle rete romane di mutualismo e sperimentazione di centri civici a supporto dello sviluppo locale integrale delle periferie. https://www.carteinregola.it/index.php/la-capitale-che-ce-gia-la-ricerca-sulle-reti-dei-poli-civici-di-roma/
  • Mangialardo, A., & Micelli, E. (2021). Grass-roots participation to enhance public real estate properties. Just a fad?. Land Use Policy, 103, 105290.
  • Mangialardo, A., & Micelli, E. (2018). From sources of financial value to commons: Emerging policies for enhancing public real‐estate assets in Italy. Papers in Regional Science, 97(4), 1397-1408.
  • Moreno, C., Allam, Z., Chabaud, D., Gall, C., & Pratlong, F. (2021). Introducing the “15-Minute City”: Sustainability, resilience and place identity in future post-pandemic cities. Smart Cities, 4(1), 93-111.
  • Moroni, S., & Tricarico, L. (2018). Distributed energy production in a polycentric scenario: policy reforms and community management. Journal of environmental planning and management, 61(11), 1973-1993.
  • OECD (2021) “Building Local Ecosystems for Social Innovation: A Methodological Framework”. Available at: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/industry-and-services/building-local-ecosystems-for-social-innovation_bef867cd-en
  • Pelling, M. (2012). The vulnerability of cities: natural disasters and social resilience. Routledge.
  • Swyngedouw, E., Moulaert, F., & Rodriguez, A. (2002). Neoliberal urbanization in Europe: large–scale urban development projects and the new urban policy. Antipode, 34(3), 542-577.
  • Tricarico, L., De Vidovich, L., & Billi, A. (2022 A). Entrepreneurship, inclusion or co-production? An attempt to assess territorial elements in social innovation literature. Cities, 130, 103986.
  • Tricarico, L., Jones, Z. M., & Daldanise, G. (2022 B). Platform Spaces: When culture and the arts intersect territorial development and social innovation, a view from the Italian context. Journal of Urban Affairs, 44(4-5), 545-566.
  • Tricarico, L., & De Vidovich, L. (2021). Proximity and post-COVID-19 urban development: Reflections from Milan, Italy. Journal of Urban Management, 10(3), 302-310.
  • Tricarico, L., Bitetti, R., & Buonanno, F. (2021). Can we shape social innovation-based urban policy? Reflections on the fondo per l’innovazione sociale strategy in Milan. Economia & lavoro, 55(1), 121-138.
  • Tricarico, L. (2018). Community energy enterprises in the distributed energy geography: A review of issues and potential approaches. International Journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management, 18, 81-94.

Dr. Luca Tricarico
Prof. Dr. Carlo Cellamare
Prof. Dr. Ezio Micelli
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • transformative economy
  • co-production
  • advocacy planning
  • urban regeneration
  • local sustainable development
  • social innovation
  • open social innovation
  • local innovation ecosystems
  • territorial policy

Published Papers (7 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

13 pages, 508 KiB  
Article
Niches Seeking Legitimacy: Notes about Social Innovation and Forms of Social Enterprise in the Italian Renewable Energy Communities
by Lorenzo De Vidovich
Sustainability 2024, 16(9), 3599; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093599 - 25 Apr 2024
Viewed by 467
Abstract
Renewable energy communities (RECs) are increasingly seen as key innovations for the development of decentralized energy systems that leverage on renewable energy co-production, sharing, and consumption. However, they still represent a niche in search of development and consolidation, and the social innovations they [...] Read more.
Renewable energy communities (RECs) are increasingly seen as key innovations for the development of decentralized energy systems that leverage on renewable energy co-production, sharing, and consumption. However, they still represent a niche in search of development and consolidation, and the social innovations they might bring to the energy systems need to be further scrutinized. Innovations related to the capacity to support forms of social entrepreneurship in the energy system are central to this analysis, even if they have been little studied in Italy in relation to the emerging field of renewable energy communities. Through a theoretical discussion aimed at fulfilling descriptive objectives, this paper examines, on the one hand, the social innovations related to community energy projects and, with a focus on Italy, the legal forms required to create an REC in the light of the constantly changing regulatory framework, where new actors, such as the Third Sector, can play a leading role as intermediary actors to develop the social implementation of REC initiatives. The paper navigates through the literature on community energy in the light of the social innovation they can bring to the energy system, discusses the niche condition of RECs, and addresses the Italian case with particular reference to the role of the Third Sector in disseminating REC innovations. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 2671 KiB  
Article
Innovating the Local Plan through Co-Creation and the Public Sociology Approach toward Urban Regeneration: An Italian Case Study
by Valentina Polci and Ilenia Pierantoni
Sustainability 2024, 16(8), 3160; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083160 - 10 Apr 2024
Viewed by 466
Abstract
This paper examines the role of social research and communication methodologies in fostering substantive democratic participation and policy co-production within the context of urban regeneration initiatives anchored in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This research critically analyzes the “becoming public” of sociology [...] Read more.
This paper examines the role of social research and communication methodologies in fostering substantive democratic participation and policy co-production within the context of urban regeneration initiatives anchored in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This research critically analyzes the “becoming public” of sociology and social research in participatory design processes related to traditional urban planning instruments at the local scale (Regulatory Plans) in the Italian context, specifically through the case study of the Municipality of Appignano. It questions the role of sociology in activating a competent public sphere and promoting deliberative democracy at urban and territorial design levels and whether we can identify the traits of public sociology in facilitating the different stages of these processes. This paper details a participatory process in Appignano that sought to innovate urban regeneration within complex legislative frameworks, emphasizing community engagement and interdisciplinary approaches. The findings reveal a community actively participating in the regeneration process, demonstrating a high level of agreement on various urban development strategies aimed at sustainability. This study underscores the capacity of public sociology to facilitate public debate and democratic dialogue and suggests that such participatory approaches can significantly contribute to sustainable and resilient urban development, highlighting the potential of sociology as a moral and political force in urban planning. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2797 KiB  
Article
They Like to Do It in Public: A Quantitative Analysis of Culture-Led Regeneration Projects in ITALY
by Ezio Micelli, Francesco Campagnari, Luca Lazzarini, Elena Ostanel and Naomi Pedri Stocco
Sustainability 2024, 16(6), 2409; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16062409 - 14 Mar 2024
Viewed by 558
Abstract
This paper presents and discusses a quantitative analysis of culture-led urban regeneration initiatives in Italy. It draws on a database of projects built using the filter of the national funding schemes launched between 2012 and 2018. The main objective of the research is [...] Read more.
This paper presents and discusses a quantitative analysis of culture-led urban regeneration initiatives in Italy. It draws on a database of projects built using the filter of the national funding schemes launched between 2012 and 2018. The main objective of the research is to build an overview of the phenomenon of culture-based urban regeneration in Italy, recognizing common trends and recurring dynamics. The projects in the database are analyzed quantitatively on the basis of 28 attributes, taking into consideration different aspects such as the projects’ localization, the typology, dimension and ownership of the spatial assets mobilized, the relationship with public policies, and the scale of actors and networks involved in the projects. The findings show that culture-led regeneration initiatives “like to do it in public”; namely, to achieve their objectives—to “do culture”—they seek to connect with the public sector to receive forms of economic, material, and organizational support, such as public spaces in which to host their activities. Therefore, the interaction with the public administration is interpreted as the sine qua non condition for the success of culture-led urban regeneration initiatives and to ensure that these are able to generate strong and durable impacts on the revitalization and regeneration of distressed urban neighborhoods. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 529 KiB  
Article
Redesigning Meso-Institutions in the Social Economy to Deal with Uncertainty: The Case of CGM Network
by Francesca Battistoni, Giulio Quaggiotto and Flaviano Zandonai
Sustainability 2024, 16(3), 1277; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031277 - 2 Feb 2024
Viewed by 781
Abstract
How can institutions in the social economy adapt to become more effective in dealing with the uncertainty of system transformation? This article focuses on “meso-institutions”, which we define as those that originated neither from a bottom-up (grassroots) approach nor from a top-down mandate [...] Read more.
How can institutions in the social economy adapt to become more effective in dealing with the uncertainty of system transformation? This article focuses on “meso-institutions”, which we define as those that originated neither from a bottom-up (grassroots) approach nor from a top-down mandate (bureaucracy). In particular, it examines the case of CGM, a network of 600 social enterprises in Italy, to investigate how it is renewing its institutional configuration and mandate to better respond to both external and internal changes. CGM has the ambition to be a “reconfigurator” of multi-local systems that can establish new rules of the game in front of the main societal challenges. This entails adopting an innovative approach to define its strategy (from a classic “five-year plan” to a “compass”), reconfiguring its role (from a solution provider to a backbone organisation) and encouraging its members to embrace digitalisation, open innovation and a new business model (platform-based). The article will focus on the tensions and opportunities that this process is surfacing while pointing to broader lessons for institutional innovation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 2091 KiB  
Article
The University and the Neighbourhood—Opportunities and Limits in Promoting Social Innovation: The Case of AuroraLAB in Turin (Italy)
by Francesca Bragaglia
Sustainability 2024, 16(2), 829; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020829 - 18 Jan 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 711
Abstract
This paper deals with the relationship between university public engagement activities and local territories in promoting social innovation processes. In particular, this paper starts from the assumption that since social innovation has become a guiding concept of policies at various scales, opportunities for [...] Read more.
This paper deals with the relationship between university public engagement activities and local territories in promoting social innovation processes. In particular, this paper starts from the assumption that since social innovation has become a guiding concept of policies at various scales, opportunities for innovation, i.e., calls for tenders, funding, etc., have multiplied. However, universities should act as intermediary actors so that the bureaucratic and managerial complexities of accessing these opportunities do not risk cutting off the territories and/or the weakest actors. Starting from the experience of the AuroraLAB action–research laboratory of the Politecnico di Torino within the Tonite project financed with European Urban Innovative Actions funds, this article investigates the multiple roles that the university can play in supporting platform spaces for inclusive social innovation based on local needs. This article concludes by highlighting the multi-layered personality of the university in neighbourhoods and the perspectives for socially engaged research. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 6306 KiB  
Article
Exploring Service Design as a Commoning Approach: The Engaging Strategy of the Service Master Planning
by Daniela Selloni and Anna Meroni
Sustainability 2023, 15(22), 16067; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152216067 - 17 Nov 2023
Viewed by 695
Abstract
This paper explores the concept of design for urban commons and its role in placemaking strategies that cater to community needs and aspirations. Placemaking is viewed as a collaborative process that involves early engagement with stakeholders to create shared visions. Design, particularly through [...] Read more.
This paper explores the concept of design for urban commons and its role in placemaking strategies that cater to community needs and aspirations. Placemaking is viewed as a collaborative process that involves early engagement with stakeholders to create shared visions. Design, particularly through co-design methodologies, scenario building and service design, can play a role in shaping public spaces for communal value and sustainability. This paper presents and discusses three case studies from Italy to introduce the concept of Service Master Planning, a methodology that combines co-design and service-centred scenarios to facilitate top-down actions that encourage bottom-up activation. It aims to co-create a vision for the future of a place involving the various actors of complex service ecosystems. Unlike traditional urban planning, which focuses mainly on the physical infrastructure, Service Master Planning emphasises services and social ecosystems. The methodology results in a strategic document, the Service Master Plan, outlining future scenarios based on contextual needs and aspirations. The successful adoption of Service Master Plan relies on inspiring spatial design and attracting community interest for co-producing the envisioned services. The challenge lies in transitioning scenarios into concrete actions, involving architectural and urban designers, and facilitating stakeholder consultations for service provision. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

12 pages, 1674 KiB  
Opinion
Placemaking in the Post-Pandemic Context: Innovation Hubs and New Urban Factories
by Luca Tricarico
Sustainability 2024, 16(3), 1030; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031030 - 25 Jan 2024
Viewed by 942
Abstract
This debate article explores the potential of urban manufacturing to rejuvenate Italian cities through the productive reuse of disused industrial heritage. It emphasizes the need for transformative placemaking approaches that integrate diverse activities, fostering economic and functional diversity within ecosystems. The paper addresses [...] Read more.
This debate article explores the potential of urban manufacturing to rejuvenate Italian cities through the productive reuse of disused industrial heritage. It emphasizes the need for transformative placemaking approaches that integrate diverse activities, fostering economic and functional diversity within ecosystems. The paper addresses key policy considerations and the impact of dedicated spaces or hubs in engaging specialized communities of workers. It acknowledges the emergence of new professional demands due to Industry 4.0 and highlights potential polarization toward highly skilled profiles. The ongoing pandemic crisis and the rise of gig and platform economies also pose challenges to traditional services and lower-skilled professionals. The paper raises questions regarding attracting makers and their contribution to urban employment growth. It underscores the importance of inclusive learning and shared prosperity by promoting the hybridization of technical, cultural, and social functions within productive-cultural sectors. The governance of hubs and innovation ecosystems necessitates a shared vision and responsibility, fostering partnerships with stakeholders at national and international levels. The examples of BASE and the Technopole of Bologna demonstrate placemaking practices that prioritize the construction of proximate relationships, extending beyond physical improvements. These practices are applied in industrial settings, research, cultural production, and education, with low barriers to entry and targeted approaches to diverse user groups. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop