Page 6 - Grazia_Napoli_2014

Agribusiness Landscape & Environment, Volume 17/2014 - Special Issue 2

Table 1.
Weights of the clusters – System A and B
Weights A Weights B
Clusters normalized ideal normalized ideal
Environmental characteristics 0,33 0,65 0,05 0,07
Architectural characteristics 0,50 1,00 0,05 0,07
Technological characteristics 0,04 0,07 0,25 0,38
Economic-financial characteristics 0,13 0,26 0,65 1,00

Table 2.
Rankings of the alternative projects
Ranking A Ranking B
Name Ideals Normals Name Ideals Normals
1 A.U. 22 1.00 0.35 A.U. 11 1.00 0.36
2 A.U. 11 0.97 0.34 A.U. 22 0.97 0.35
3 A.U. 23 0.58 0.20 A.U. 23 0.48 0.17
4 A.U. 26 0.24 0.08 A.U. 26 0.22 0.08
5 A.U. 2 0.10 0.03 A.U. 2 0.10 0.04

Summary

Devising a multicriteria evaluation model (ANP) applied to Favignana’s traditional architecture
can be regarded as a demonstration of how such kind of models could play a crucial role in any
political and economic decision making process that has to be founded on the acknowledge of
the usefulness/uselessness of the architectural and landscape heritage. In this case study, the
ANP model compares five alternative restoration projects and defines the rankings which will
be used to establish the financial priority in case of limited public assets. The ranking can
change according to the systems of weights expressing the social use values accepted by the
local community according, or not according, to the Heidegger’s thought (2000) ‘the greatest
usefulness is the uselessness’ (which considers the usefulness in its salvific meaning since is
what makes a man a man) or to Ordine (2013), who states that if we allow the gratuitous to
come to an end -thus renouncing to the generating strenght of the uselessness- we will obtain a
forgetful community which will lose the meaning of itself and of life.

Bibliography

1. Bottero, M.; & Ferretti, V. (2011). An Analytic Network Process-based Approach for
Location Problems: The Case of a New Waste Incinerator Plant in the Province of
Torino (Italy). Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 17, 63–84.
2. Bouyssou, D.; & Marchant, T.; & Pirlot, M.; & Tsoukiàs, A.; & Vincke, P. (2006).
Evaluation and Decision Models: Stepping Stones for the Analyst. Springer Verlag,
Berlin.
3. Calvino, I. (1972). Le città invisibili. Einaudi, Torino.
4. Figueira, J.; & Greco, S.; & Ehrgott, M. (eds) (2005). Multiple Criteria Decision
Analysis. State of the Art Survey. Springer, New York.
5. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971). The Entropy Law and the Economic Process. Harvard
University Press, Cambridge.
6. Heidegger,M. (2000). Seminari di Zollicon. Guida, Napoli.
7. La Rocca, T.; & Leopardi, M.; & Napoli, G. (1995). Gli indistinti confini. Medina, Palermo.

80