EURO 2024 Copenhagen
Abstract Submission

EURO-Online login

2463. Argumentation Schemes for Urban Decision Support

Invited abstract in session TB-47: Portfolio Risk Management, stream Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis.

Tuesday, 10:30-12:00
Room: 50 (building: 324)

Authors (first author is the speaker)

1. Isabella Lami
DIST, Politecnico di Torino
2. Marta Bottero
Department of Urban and Regional Studies and Planning, Politecnico di Torino
3. Beatrice Mecca
Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Politecnico di Torino
4. Gabriella Pigozzi
CNRS - LAMSADE, Université Paris Dauphine - PSL
5. Alexis Tsoukias
CNRS - LAMSADE

Abstract

The decision-making process in urban planning and design projects is inherently complex as it embraces so many different actors, interests, dimensions and uncertainties. Evaluation plays a key role in supporting such processes, as a guide to prioritising decisions based on the observation of data derived from analyses, measurements and estimations. In this context, the paper investigates the potential benefits of argumentation theory aimed at managing the complexity of information and knowledge about the situation under analysis through specific schemes. Indeed, argumentation-based approaches make it possible not only to identify a 'good' choice, but also to formulate, through a logic-based formalism, a final recommendation in a graphic and mutually comprehensible form. In this sense, the paper starts from the exploration of an emblematic case study of the city of Turin, which saw numerous actors, interests and critical points in its decision-making process, proposing an a posteriori argumentation scheme. The latter highlights the points of agreement and disagreement that led to a design strategy that was justified and satisfactory to the decision-making actors. Through application, the potential and criticalities of this approach in decision support in the urban context are observed.

Keywords

Status: accepted

Back to the list of papers