Urban Regeneration: between Resilience and Sustainability
Roberto Bologna, Paola Gallo

Abstract
The paper describes the main theoretical and practical lines that affect the scientific activities carried out at the University of Florence by some members of the scientific section of Architectural Technology on the issues of sustainability and Technological Innovation in the Design of Urban Environment. The methodological aspects and the findings of two researchers are described as a result of the national and international experiences developed by the researchers in the last years.
These works represent some of the research programs in the field of Architectural Technology, with a perspective that emphasizes the topic of sustainable development both from an environmental and social point of view, in order to assure a good economic growth of the countries.
 

Parole chiave:
PE8-11          Product design, ergonomics, man-machine interfaces
PE8-12          Sustainable design (for recycling, for environment, eco-design)
SH3-1            Environment, resources and sustainability

 

Resilient requalification of urban space
One of the issues faced by the Florentine unit is housing emergency related to migration flows and the urbanization of poverty.
Since some years, more than half (54%) of the world population lives in high-density urban settlements, with a trend reaching the 66% in 2050 (UNDESA, 2015). This phenomenon has determined a continuous growth of the urban areas, above all in the developed countries, where the construction of at least 70 million new homes are expected in the next year (UN-Habitat, 2003).
This urbanization phenomenon regards mostly the population that shows economic, social, and cultural disadvantages. These people adapt themselves to live in poor settlements made up by precarious dwellings without any supporting infrastructure. The parts of the city where they live are known by many names: slums, favelas, villas miseria, shantytowns, bidonvilles (Sampò, 2012). These informal settlements (that are usually illegal and out of public institutions control) generate unbearable living conditions from an environmental, as well as social and cultural point of view. The spontaneous growth of the informal settlements generates risk of various conditions: from the hydrogeological risk caused by the structural instability of soils to the structural one caused by poor construction, from the sanitary risk caused by the precarious health conditions to the social one caused by the engraftment of crime.     
The phenomenon of urbanization and housing emergency is further exacerbated by the migration flows which, in recent years, have been particularly affecting the European and Mediterranean countries (UNDESA, 2016). Conflicts, economic instability, loss of human and civil rights, natural and man-made disasters, and climate change, pushed a large number of people to migrate to other territories which have to bear a pressing and unstable housing demand from people affected by a serious social and economic crisis. Looking at this reality, careful attention is given to the planning of settlements and the building design, both in the case of renovation and new construction.
This means conceiving a habitat able to meet the minimum requirements in compliance with environmental and architectural quality; or working on the concept of “architecture of necessity” characterized by aspects (affordability, essentiality, simplicity of construction, reversibility, recyclability etc.) common to many fields of living.
Raise the quality level means overcome that state of insecurity, usually associated with the concept of provisional, and recover a level of livability closest to the ordinary one, although in a transitional condition; this means addressing the issue of inhabited space resilient with respect to the urgent transformation dynamics reflecting on new forms of social life, on formal and informal construction of habitats, on the metamorphosis of the city and of the territory, on the different levels of appropriation of the public and private space, on the integration processes in the context of a multicultural society, being aware of the need to deal with the issues related to environmental, social and economic sustainability and technical and operational feasibility of the projects.

Given the globalization of phenomena and the international dimension of the problems, the research arises mainly in a context of collaboration with foreign institutions. In the specific case of the upgrading of the informal settlements, the research has been developed in the framework of the international agreement of scientific and cultural cooperation between the University of Florence and the Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (Brasil) through both a theoretical and practical seminar based on the analysis of a specific study case (the Serrinha Favela in Florianopolis in the State of Santa Catarina) (fig. 1a/1b) and the setting of design indicators for the sustainable upgrading1. The absence of any kind of territorial and urban planning model associated to the development of these informal communities often makes it difficult to orientate the planning of reliable scenarios. This procedural lack determined the need to approach design with an operating methodology aimed firstly to identify risk causes, and then to find solutions to improve the living quality of informal settlements, in their relationship to the territory.
The design proposals have been based on the following needs:
·    to decrease informal land consumption, adopting models for public occupation of “non-built areas” strictly associated to the local culture which can host social and economic activities for the community;
·    to increase green areas, intended as a linear and physical space, that redraws the boundaries of the informal settlements, and as a “non-built area” to be used in agricultural production;
·    to reduce landslide risk, adopting urban solutions that promote rainwater saving;
·    to increase technological solutions to promote self-construction processes, with the use of recycled and/or recyclable materials and energy passive solutions at urban and building scale, with the aim to improve the indoor and outdoor comfort;
·    to perform passive solutions at urban and building scale for the optimization of natural ventilation instead of traditional mechanical ventilation systems.

All proposals have been based on the concept of infrastructure as basic element in settlement upgrading. It could provide network services necessary for the inhabitants of the favela (roads, power etc.), assuming not only the technical and constructive solutions, but also a model coherent with the economic capacity and user management according a thematic approach that has mainly showed positive results in case of slum upgrading (Abbott, 2002). These considerations arise from the observation that, in the case of Serrinha Favela as for many Brazilian ones, the local municipality attend regularly later, investing significant financial resources to solve problems arising from the lack of services and general infrastructures at first of spontaneous settlement. From this point of view it is assumed that the municipality becomes the main actor in the upgrading process providing an infrastructural system (Friedman, 2009). In the specific case of the Serrinha Favela the activity of design research (fig. 2a, 2b, 2c) has been finalized to the introduction in a masterplan of a regeneration evolutive model, importing the concept of social infrastructure in to a physical network of spaces for the community in order to develop its own identity and at the same time the integration with the formal city according to primary planning and design strategies: regulate urban expansion on the territory re-defining the boundaries, determining a settlement model compatible with the cultural traditions and physical characteristics of the context based on the concepts of environmental sustainability and social cohesion, provide housing with the primary services (roads, water supply, electricity, sewerage etc.), establish social services for the community (social and cultural centers, childcare centers, commercial facilities etc.), establish the minimum conditions of security against the prevalent structural, hydrogeological, sanitary, electrical risks, stimulate initiatives, participation and community self-determination processes in a framework of general rules, promote a self-sustaining local and legal economy.

 

Urban Enthropy and Sustainibility
In the field of technological design for architecture, the main interlocutors of those researches developed by the University and the recognised Research Centre in the 08 area (engineering and architecture) are building enterprises, industries involved in technological components construction, and public administrations (regions, municipalities, cities). They respectively represent the community producing scientific and technological knowledge (the offer)  and the community takes advantage of the scientific and technological knowledge as social and cultural capital (the request) (Gallo, 2017).
In this Scenario, starting form the European Framework Programmes included the last Horizon 2020, the role of the offer became more important, of industries and enterprises then, as participation between private and public became favourable, in order to convert theoretical research in applied research.
Thanks to the determining impulse of the European Union, emerged the necessity of considering the development goals of the enterprises within a new competitiveness concept which we refer to as “ economy capability to guarantee to its population, on sustainable basis, high and growing levels of quality of life and high occupation” (Lisbona 2000).
What aforesaid put the basis for a change in productive politics: a sustainable development requires social and environmental safeguard, which, together, has to enhance economical growth.
The European Union added the environmental element to the economical and social ones while talking about development (Göteborg  European Council 2011), as a booster for technological innovation and potential and economical investments, that might further generate occupation and wealth.
In the last difficult years, in order to face the challenge of nationalising markets, industries have innovated their management  and productive processes, and districts have stented their limits and spread their networks.
Furthermore, companies often marked how their competitiveness, in regards to technological and international competition, was related to the territory’s  elements: that’s why an integrated  governance of actions and persons is needed. Following this concept and applying it to those problematic areas of our territory (from an environmental point of view) an important step was taken in the recent years: enlargement of the concept or marginal areas regeneration. In particular abandoned productive areas through the application of communitarian programmes2 and national instruments3 , became a target in territorial regenerations, as fundamental areas  for the Public Administration’s governance strategies (fig. 3).
In particular, the Regions’ sensibility in considering the environmental subject in their planning strategies and their will to programme and standardize initiatives in this field, encouraged governance actions concerning abandoned productive areas reusal and regeneration  (Regione Marche 2005).
Despite these initiatives, a main problem is the lack of interest toward those areas, totally or partially abandoned, located in smaller towns or in the cities’ peripheries. Indeed these areas poorly attract estate investors, that tend to prefer abandoned industrial areas located in more dense urban areas, and that have often been subject of transformations and speculative operations  (Cetica 1998).
The phenomenon of industrial areas in state of abandon and/or in regeneration, poses important questions that might be  tackled through architectural critical instruments. These need to consider the complex relation between the concept of vacant area as a resource and the concept of  territorial development and preservation, and furthermore the difficulty in facing and managing both a material and an immaterial heritage.
The intervention on industrial areas (new and existing ones) are therefore an occasion for a new scenario of ecological productive areas generation. The industrial area management, according to  general and specific regulations 4 , has to represent a benefit for the enterprises (in terms of sustainability in production processes) and has to enhance the quality of life in the area itself and in the territory where it is located (Gallo, Carletti 2000).

Sustainability in urban transformations: a rediscovered concept
Several administrations, interpreting the innovational needs of the production systems and processes,  caught the occasion to create an environment that could enhance  enterprises’ development and generate new capabilities, focused not only on product quality, but also on the quality of the territory generating the products themselves.
In this framework a group of researchers of the Università di Firenze5 in partnership with the Regione Toscana6 developed a research that defined programmatic guidelines for a new concept of an industrial productive area that might consider its effect on the environmental  contexts in which it is located, and viceversa the context’s effect on the area itself (Regione Toscana 2006).
The research focused on subjects that were already pursued at a European and national level and especially on:
·    Industrial districts renovation
·    Enterprises clusters enhancement aiming to improve the industries competiveness
·    Interaction between endogenous and exogenous development logic

According to that, following the programmatic national guidelines toward industrial areas and the costumers’ requests, the research focused on the definition of  specific guidelines and programmatic directions  that might guide the abandoned industrial area transformation interventions. The transformation process will indeed be able to change the area’s character  from residual spaces to resources for the city.
The subject was introduced by the D.Lgs. n. 112/98, also known as “Decreto Bassanini”  that pointed the so-called APEA Ecologically Equipped Productive Areas. The law demands single Regions the will to legislate, while posing some general basis:
1.   Ecologically equipped productive areas are characterized by those infrastructures and systems necessary to guarantee environmental safeguard , health and security.
2.   Ecologically equipped productive areas are characterized by a unitary management system of infrastructures and services
3.   The productive equipment’s in ecologically equipped productive areas are exempt from authorizations acquisition for the usage of the area’s services.

In this scenario the national and regional laws issued so far aimed to verify the actual opportunity of realising, or regenerating, ecologically equipped productive areas on regional territories, in order to define a new sustainable anthropic paysage reaching the goals of environmental quality and infrastructural integration.
According to that the research’s objective was defining and innovative methodology for the design and the regeneration of industrial (productive)  areas, changing the production process from being an environmental problem to a development opportunity.

Applied research work objectives
The  APEA model state of the arte recognition shows multiple scenarios. Indeed only a few7 Regions took a step towards the mere law acceptance, even if,  in those cases, where a specific legislation hasn’t been pursued, regulations enhancing a sustainable management of productive areas and the creation of Industrial Eco-Parks have been registered (Bollini, Borsari, Stacchini 2007). 
The Regione Toscana, starting form the Piano Regionale di Azione Ambientale 2007-2010, pursued this opportunity, activating specific initiative that involved the stakeholders involved in productive areas management. The aim was defining, starting from the analysis of experiences, best practice and the comparison with case studies of different regions, a range of references and indications that might make the APEA instrument viable for the Tuscan territory. In the last few years, the importance of safeguarding such an innovative and complex regulation became clear and viable through the activation of  debate opportunities, both at national level with the central public administration and other regions, and at local level with the main stakeholders.
For this reason, and in order to reach the law’s objective, a working table involving Regione Toscana, Dipartimento di Architettura8  and the Scuola Superiore di S. Anna di Pisa, was created. Its aim was thus creating a non prescriptive regulation and a specific guideline for the sustainable design of productive areas: it consists of a document that develops and describes all the project aspects pointing the best methods for an ecologically equipped  productive area  project (fig. 4).
According to the APEA  requirements shared by the Regions  that participated in the guidelines elaboration, the research group work was conducted as follows:
·    First of all the excellent performances while researching in APEA, might start from special design, technological and mobility network, urbanisation rules definition;
·    Secondly, the research focused on technical aspects also at a building level: the application of best (from and environmental point of view) technologies  (dual networks for the water cycle, energy production), common spaces and equipment (common  waste ares, common rain water harvesting and treatment areas);
·    Finally the work focused on the optimization of the management systems and links between the various enterprises involved . For example a common management systems of spaces, waste storage and reuse, mobility, energy etc.

The guidelines structure was defined by the research group  was conceived in order to show the man strategies, opportunities and benefits  that an APEA project can offer to an existing economic and productive context.

Strategic objectives and research results dissemination strategies
The methodology pursued for the APEA Guidelines started with the individuation of the Environmental Themes, to which corresponds Strategic Objectives defining specific Actions fulfilling the APEA requirements.
In particular the particular themes show the essential principle for planning and sustainable development, in order to define which equipment and characteristics a productive area will have to have to be defined “ecologic”.
After a first comparison between: project goals, expected interventions , regional government orientation , and production exigencies, the main actions, viable to reach the mentioned goals, were systematized, and it was furthermore possible to define the most viable  and efficient strategies for the renovation of industrial and productive factories.
It has been furthermore  necessary to point the sectors where mentioned actions could be applied in order to define an Ecologically Equipped Productive Area, and this was pursued through the identification of three technical parameters9 which represent the actions’ application level:
·    Unitary area management through the subject of the Soggetto Gestore, which is in charge of programming, infrastructure management, and common economical aspects management;
·    Urban planning elements, which represent a key element for the settlement location choice, for the area accessibility design , and for the connection with the next territory and the urban settlements evaluation;
·    Set and to be set enterprises involvement , that are responsible of the area management, and which requirements determine their belonging to  the APEA or not.

The research work  concluded firstly with the publication of a Regulation for the APEA in Tuscany that aims to create a governance model sustainability-oriented  and that enhances public-private collaboration, and later on with the Guide Lines publication, a project instrument for several stakeholders (public administrations, designers, entrepreneurs) for the realization of a productive area that fits the APEA requirements 10.

 

Future developments
The research topics open the discussion of many issues. A first area of consideration is the role of the designer and the participation of the actors to the design process. In a world where all is design and all are designing (Manzini, 2015) the role of the architect-urban designer is not anymore that one of the demiurge dispensing solutions, but rather that one of a cultural mediator facilitating the dialogue and stimulating the contribution and the participation of all the stakeholders; a figure able to recognize the requests of the community and government on one hand and the needs of real user on the other. Only in such a way it is possible to overcome in advance the resolution of the conflict areas, such as those typically recalled in the researches, in order to assure the best quality of the result.
A second area of consideration regards the design of territorial and urban space according to criteria of adaptability and flexibility in time, that makes it possible to limit the “mortgage” and the permanent obligation of the soil, but assures the continuous evolution of the city following the social and economic dynamics of transformation according to the concept of temporary urbanism (Bishop and Williams, 2012).
A third and last area of consideration is the concept of the green economy in which the construction sector is primarily involved. This means to introduce the principle of the circular economy (recycling, reusing, regenerating) and stimulate new economic models in the production processes as well as in the strategy of urban development, considering the specific territorial conditions, enhancing, at the same time, the natural, cultural and social capital.

Notes 

 

The Authors

Roberto Bologna (1959), Architect and Ph.D. in Architectural Technology, Full Professor Architectural Technology (ICAR12) at the  iDipartimento di Architettura, Università degli Studi di Firenze
Paola Gallo (1964), Architect and Ph.D. in Architectural Technology, Associate Professor Architectural Technology (ICAR12). Scientific Administrator of ABITA research centre, develops her research activities in the filed of technical innovation and technology in the architectural design project.

 

Riferimenti bibliografici

Abbott J. (2002), An analysis of informal settlement upgrading and critique of existing methodological approaches, Habitat International, n. 26/2002, p. 303-315.
Bishop P., Williams L. (2012), The Temporary City, Routledge, London.
Bologna R., (2016), The requalification of the informal city. The favela Serrinha in Florianopolis. TECHNE, vol. 11, pp. 194-200, ISSN:2239-0243.
Bologna R., Gallo P., Romano R., Calcagno G., (2016), Living the informal city. Sustainable design education in risk areas. In: PLEA 2016: 32nd International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Los Angeles, 11-13 July, PLEA 2016 Los Angeles, pp. 833-839, ISBN:978-0-692-74961-6.
Capestro A. (2012), Progettando città. Riflessioni sul metodo della progettazione urbana, Firenze University press, Firenze.
Cetica P.A., (1998), Strumenti e Procedure per la Gestione Strategica del Disegno Urbano Sostenibile” in: Proceedings of workshop “Information Systems and Processes for Urban Civil Engineering Application, COST UCE ACTION C4, WG1: Information, Knowledge and organisation, European Communities”, Belgium.
Conclusioni della Presidenza Consiglio Europeo di LISBONA, 23 e 24 marzo 2000
Friedman Y. (2009), L’architettura di sopravvivenza. Una filosofia della povertà, Torino, Bollati.
Bollini G., Borsari L., Stacchini V. (2007), Insediamenti industriali e sostenibilità. Linee guida per la realizzazione di Aree Poduttive Ecologicamente Attrezzate, Alinea editrice, Firenze.
Gallo P. (2017), Lo scenario della ricerca per l’innovazione tecnologica tra pubblico e privato, atti del seminario “La Progettazione Tecnologica e gli Scenari della Ricerca ”, Milano 16 settembre 2016  in corso di pubblicazione.
Gallo P., Carletti C., (2000), Principles and Guidelines for a Sustainable Environmental Developmen”, in: Proceedings of PLEA 17th International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture London, 3-5 July, Steemers, K.; Yannas, S. (a cura di), James & James (Science publishers), Ltd 2000.
Linee Guida per le APEA e casi pilota nella Regione Marche. Regione Marche, Servizio Ambiente e difesa del suolo. Autorità Ambientale Regionale, Gennaio 2005.  
Manzini E. (2015), Design, When Everybody Designs, MIT Press, Cambridge. 
Rapporto sulle conclusioni della Presidenza Consiglio Europeo di GÖTEBORG 15 E 16 giugno 2001, SN 200/1/01 REV 1.
Regione Toscana, Linee guida per la valutazione della qualità ambientale ed energetica degli edifici in Toscana, maggio 2006.
Sampo’ L. (2012), The Post-Urban Age, verso una nuova forma di insediamento, Boundaries “The other city”, n. 4/2012.
UN-Habitat (2003), The challenge of Slum. Global report on Human Settlements 2003, Hearthscan, London and Sterling.
UN-Habitat, Housing and Slum upgrading, [Online] Available: http://unhabitat.org/urban-themes/housing-slum-upgrading/ 18/01/2016].
United Nations, Department of Economic adn Social Affairs, (2016), International Migration Report 2015. (ST/ESA/SER.A/375 ) UN, New York.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2015), World Population Prospects: The 2014 Revision, (ST/ESA/SER.A/366) UN, New York.