Sustainability Impact Unveiled: Validating a Multi-criteria tool for Assessing Citizen Initiatives
Keywords:
Abstract
Numerous studies highlight the pivotal role of Citizen Initiatives (CIs) in urban sustainability, yet existing methodologies often fall short in capturing their comprehensive neighborhood impact. This article validates the Multi-criteria tool for Assessing the Sustainability of CIs (MASCIs), specifically designed for the nuanced assessment of CIs on neighborhood sustainability. The primary objective is to thoroughly assess and validate MASCIs through a mixed-method approach, including interviews with fifteen experts surveyed on the system's suitability and application to six CIs in Barcelona. Results show that 53.33% of experts found current indicators suitable, with valuable suggestions for improvement. The implementation of the system in CIs validates the usefulness of the tool to quantify the impact of these initiatives in the community. The study reveals the nuanced nature of these initiatives, emphasizing context, stakeholder participation, and adaptability. This research enriches discussions on citizen-driven sustainability by addressing gaps in evaluation systems, deepening our understanding of their broader implications for urban development.
Downloads
References
Abbasi, M. H., Abdullah, B., Castaño-Rosa, R., Ahmad, M. W., & Rostami, A. (2023). A Framework to Identify and Prioritise the Key Sustainability Indicators: Assessment of Heating Systems in the Built Environment. Sustainable Cities and Society, 95, 104629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104629
Google Scholar CrossrefAcosta Pérez, E., Gil-Fournier Esquerra, M., & Jaenicke Fontao, M. (2013). Vivero de iniciativas ciudadanas : transferencia de la innovación ciudadana al espacio público. Educación Social : Revista de Intervención Socioeducativa, 55, 94–102. http://hdl.handle.net/11162/99207
Google Scholar CrossrefAhmad, S., & Wong, K. Y. (2019). Development of weighted triple-bottom line sustainability indicators for the Malaysian food manufacturing industry using the Delphi method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 229, 1167–1182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.399
Google Scholar CrossrefAlqahtany, A. (2019). Developing a consensus-based measures for housing delivery in Dammam Metropolitan Area, Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 12(2), 226–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-08-2018-0059
Google Scholar CrossrefAsogwa Simeon, U., Benjamin, O. A., John, T. O., Ikenga, P. U., Rebecca, G. N., & Albert, O. (2023). Examining the Views and Opinions of Itinerary Traders on Adherence to COVID-19 Lockdown in Enugu State, Nigeria. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 16, 411–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-023-00376-y
Google Scholar CrossrefBerigüete Alcántara, F. E., Rodríguez Cantalapiedra, I., & Roca Blanch, E. (2019). Herramientas y criterios para una ciudad sostenible. International Conference Virtual City and Territory, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5821/ctv.8300
Google Scholar CrossrefBerigüete Alcántara, F., R. Cantalapiedra, I., Palumbo Fernández, M., & Masseck, T. (2022). ¿Cómo medir el impacto de las iniciativas ciudadanas en la sostenibilidad urbana? ACE: Architecture, City and Environment, 17(49), 10413. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5821/ace.17.49.10413
Google Scholar CrossrefBerigüete, F. E., Rodriguez Cantalapiedra, I., Palumbo, M., & Masseck, T. (2023). Collective Intelligence to Co-Create the Cities of the Future: Proposal of an Evaluation Tool for Citizen Initiatives. Sustainability, 15(10), 7956. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107956
Google Scholar CrossrefBolado, R., Ibañez, J., & Lantarón, A. (1998). El Juicio de Expertos. Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear. ISBN: 84-95341-05-0
Google Scholar CrossrefCámara Menoyo, C. (2012). Las iniciativas de participación ciudadana en el urbanismo. El urbanismo participativo, una nueva forma de entender la ciudad y la ciudadanía en la configuración de espacios públicos. URBS: Revista de Estudios Urbanos y Ciencias Sociales, 2(1), 19–32. ISSN-e 2014-2714
Google Scholar CrossrefDaugavietis, J. E., Soloha, R., Dace, E., & Ziemele, J. (2022). A Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods for Sustainability Assessment of District Heating Systems. Energies, 15(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/en15072411
Google Scholar CrossrefDijkstra, J., Galbraith, R., Hodges, B. D., McAvoy, P. A., McCrorie, P., Southgate, L. J., Van Der Vleuten, C. P., Wass, V., & Schuwirth, L. W. (2012). Expert validation of fit-for-purpose guidelines for designing programmes of assessment. BMC Medical Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-12-20
Google Scholar CrossrefEscobar-Pérez, J., & Cuervo-Martínez, Á. (2008). Validez De Contenido Y Juicio De Expertos: Una Aproximación a su Utilización. Avances En Medición, 6 (September), 27–36. ISSN 1692-0023
Google Scholar CrossrefEuropean Commission. (n.d.). Competence Centres for Social Innovation. Retrieved October 10, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/european-social-fund-plus/es/node/258
Google Scholar CrossrefFernández-Gómez, E., Martín-Salvador, A., Luque-Vara, T., Sánchez-Ojeda, M. A., Navarro-Prado, S., & Enrique-Mirón, C. (2020). Content validation through expert judgement of an instrument on the nutritional knowledge, beliefs, and habits of pregnant women. Nutrients, 12(4),1136. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12041136
Google Scholar CrossrefFernández-Sánchez, G., & Rodríguez-López, F. (2010). A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management - Application to infrastructure projects in Spain. Ecological Indicators, 10(6), 1193–1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.04.009
Google Scholar CrossrefFigueiredo, K., Pierott, R., Hammad, A. W. A., & Haddad, A. (2021). Sustainable material choice for construction projects: A Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment framework based on BIM and Fuzzy-AHP. Building and Environment, 196(February), 107805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107805
Google Scholar CrossrefGandini, A., Garmendia, L., Prieto, I., Álvarez, I., & San-José, J. T. (2020). A holistic and multi-stakeholder methodology for vulnerability assessment of cities to flooding and extreme precipitation events. Sustainable Cities and Society, 63(May). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102437
Google Scholar CrossrefGani, A., Asjad, M., Talib, F., Khan, Z. A., & Siddiquee, A. N. (2021). Identification, ranking and prioritisation of vital environmental sustainability indicators in manufacturing sector using pareto analysis cum best-worst method. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 14(3), 226–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2021.1889705
Google Scholar CrossrefGasparatos, A., & Scolobig, A. (2012). Choosing the most appropriate sustainability assessment tool. Ecological Economics, 80, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.05.005
Google Scholar CrossrefGeist, M. R. (2010). Using the Delphi method to engage stakeholders: A comparison of two studies. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(2), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.006
Google Scholar CrossrefGómez, M. V., & Lebrusán, I. (2022). Urban Ageing, Gender and the Value of the Local Environment: The Experience of Older Women in a Central Neighbourhood of Madrid, Spain. Land, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091456
Google Scholar CrossrefGrafakos, S., Enseñado, E. M., & Flamos, A. (2017). Developing an integrated sustainability and resilience framework of indicators for the assessment of low-carbon energy technologies at the local level. International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 36(10), 945–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2015.1130709
Google Scholar CrossrefGuest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Google Scholar CrossrefGutiérrez-Fernández, F., Cloquell Ballester, V. A., & Cloquell Ballester, V. (2012). Propuesta de un sistema de indicadores de sostenibilidad para áreas naturales con uso turístico, validado mediante consulta a terceros. Turismo y Sociedad, 60, 55–83. ISSN-e 0120-7555
Google Scholar CrossrefHallowell, M. R., & Gambatese, J. A. (2010). Qualitative Research: Application of the Delphi Method to CEM Research. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(1), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000137
Google Scholar CrossrefHenning, J. I. F., & Jordaan, H. (2016). Determinants of financial sustainability for farm credit applications: A Delphi Study. Sustainability (Switzerland), 8(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010077
Google Scholar CrossrefHsu, C. H., Chang, A. Y., & Luo, W. (2017). Identifying key performance factors for sustainability development of SMEs – integrating QFD and fuzzy MADM methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 161, 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.063
Google Scholar CrossrefKaur, H., & Garg, P. (2019). Urban sustainability assessment tools: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 210, 146–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.009
Google Scholar CrossrefLazar, N., & Chithra, K. (2021). Evaluation of sustainability criteria for residential buildings of tropical climate: The stakeholder perspective. Energy and Buildings, 232, 110654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110654
Google Scholar CrossrefLoikkanen, O., Lahdelma, R., & Salminen, P. (2017). Multicriteria evaluation of sustainable energy solutions for Colosseum. Sustainable Cities and Society, 35(August), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.07.019
Google Scholar CrossrefLópez-Arquillos, A., Rubio-Romero, J. C., Súarez-Cebador, M., & Pardo-Ferreira, M. del C. (2015). Comparative risk assessment of vehicle maintenance activities: Hybrid, battery electric, and hydrogen fuel cell cars. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 47, 53–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2015.02.005
Google Scholar CrossrefLune, H., & Berg, B. L. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (A. Dodge (ed.); 9th editio). Pearson Education Limited. ISBN-13: 978-0134202136
Google Scholar CrossrefMarshall, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., & Fontenot, R. (2013). Does Sample Size Matter in Qualitative Research?: A Review of Qualitative Interviews in is Research. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2013.11645667
Google Scholar CrossrefMartinez, C. (2013). Los Pilares Del Desarrollo Sostenible Sofisma O Realidad. In Proyecto de Virtualización VUAD (Ediciones, Issue 12). Universidad Santo Tomás. ISBN: 978-958-631-841-9
Google Scholar CrossrefMattoni, B., Pompei, L., Losilla, J. C., & Bisegna, F. (2020). Planning smart cities: Comparison of two quantitative multicriteria methods applied to real case studies. Sustainable Cities and Society, 60(May). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102249
Google Scholar CrossrefMulgan, G. (2006). The Process of Social Innovation. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 1(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1162/itgg.2006.1.2.145
Google Scholar CrossrefMulgan, G., Tucker, S., Rushanara, A., & Sanders, B. (2007). Social Innovation: what it is, why it matters, how it can be accelerated. The Young Foundation. The Basingstoke Press. ISBN 1-905551-03-7 / 978-1-905551-03-3
Google Scholar CrossrefNess, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., & Olsson, L. (2007). Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics, 60(3), 498–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.023
Google Scholar CrossrefObservatorio de la Realidad Social. (2016). Guía para la Evaluación de la Innovación Social. Observatorio de la Realidad Social. https://www.observatoriorealidadsocial.es/en/social-innovation-evaluation-guide-and-tool/co-14/#
Google Scholar CrossrefOssadnik, W., Schinke, S., & Kaspar, R. H. (2016). Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis. Group Decision and Negotiation, 25(2), 421–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-015-9448-4
Google Scholar CrossrefÖzpehlivan, M., & Acar, A. Z. (2016). Development and validation of a multidimensional job satisfaction scale in different cultures. Cogent Social Sciences, 2(1), 1237003. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1237003
Google Scholar CrossrefPeng Xu, P., Chan, E. H. W., & Qian, Q. K. (2012). Key performance indicators (KPI) for the sustainability of building energy efficiency retrofit (BEER) in hotel buildings in China. Facilities, 30(9/10), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632771211235242
Google Scholar CrossrefPinto, H., Nogueira, C., Guerreiro, J. A., & Sampaio, F. (2021). Social Innovation and the Role of the State: Learning from the Portuguese Experience on Multi-Level Interactions. World, 2(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.3390/world2010005
Google Scholar CrossrefPujadas, P., Pardo-Bosch, F., Aguado-Renter, A., & Aguado, A. (2017). MIVES multi-criteria approach for the evaluation, prioritization, and selection of public investment projects. A case study in the city of Barcelona. Land Use Policy, 64, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.02.014
Google Scholar CrossrefRådestad, M., Jirwe, M., Castrén, M., Svensson, L., Gryth, D., & Rüter, A. (2013). Essential key indicators for disaster medical response suggested to be included in a national uniform protocol for documentation of major incidents: A Delphi study. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, 21(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-21-68
Google Scholar CrossrefRigo, P. D., Rediske, G., Rosa, C. B., Gastaldo, N. G., Michels, L., Júnior, A. L. N., & Siluk, J. C. M. (2020). Renewable energy problems: Exploring the methods to support the decision-making process. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(23), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310195
Google Scholar CrossrefRobles Garrote, P., & Rojas, M. del C. (2015). La validación por juicio de expertos: dos investigaciones cualitativas en Lingüística aplicada Validation by expert judgements: two cases of qualitative research in Applied Linguistics. Revista Nebrija, 18. ISSN-e 1699-6569
Google Scholar CrossrefSharifi, A., & Murayama, A. (2013). A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 38, 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2012.06.006
Google Scholar CrossrefSingh, R. K., Murty, H. R., Gupta, S. K., & Dikshit, A. K. (2012). An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators, 15(1), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.01.007
Google Scholar CrossrefUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme. (2021). Her City: Let her guide you (Global Utm). UN-Habitat. ISBN: 978-91-88331-37-3
Google Scholar CrossrefValles, M. S. (2002). Entrevistas cualitativas. In Cuadernos Metodológicos (1st editio, Vol. 32). Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas. ISBN: 84-7476-342-8
Google Scholar CrossrefWang, J. J., Jing, Y. Y., Zhang, C. F., & Zhao, J. H. (2009). Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(9), 2263–2278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.06.021
Google Scholar CrossrefXinbo, Z. (2021). Multinational Companies’ Hedging Effectiveness of Foreign Exchange Risk: A Quantitative Comparison Study. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 14, 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-020-00305-3
Google Scholar CrossrefZio, E. (1996). On the use of the analytic hierarchy process in the aggregation of expert judgments. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 53(2), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0951-8320(96)00060-9
Google Scholar CrossrefPublished
Metrics
Almetric
Dimensions
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Fanny E. Beriguete , Inma R. Cantalapiedra, Mariana Palumbo , Torsten Masseck

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are published under Creative Commons copyright (CC BY). Authors hold the copyright and retain publishing rights without restrictions, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles as the original source is cited.