Coherences and Differences among EU, US and PRC Approaches for Rural Urban Development: Interscalar and Interdisciplinary Analysis

Roberto De Lotto, Tiziano Cattaneo, Emanuele Giorgi and Elisabetta M. Venco
Additional contact information
Roberto De Lotto: Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, DICAr, University of Pavia, via Ferrata 3, 27100 Pavia, Italy
Tiziano Cattaneo: Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, DICAr, University of Pavia, via Ferrata 3, 27100 Pavia, Italy
Emanuele Giorgi: Escuela de Arquitectura y Diseño, División de Ingeniería y Arquitectura, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus León, Av. Eugenio Garza Sada S/N, Cerro Gordo, 37190 León, Mexico
Elisabetta M. Venco: Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, DICAr, University of Pavia, via Ferrata 3, 27100 Pavia, Italy

Sustainability, 2017, vol. 9, issue 4, 1-26

Abstract: The main goal of this paper is to translate the indexing of a projects’ Data Base, based on EU vocabulary on rural urban development, into different lexicons. Built on the groundwork laid in previous researches, the authors want to enlarge the methodology applied in European Union (EU) territory and defined with Rural Architectural Intensification (RAI) and Rural Architectural Urbanism (RAU) to other contexts, in particular People’s Republic of China (PRC) and United States (US), keeping, however, this research at theoretical and methodological definition level. The study of coherences and differences between EU, US and China for rural urban development implies an interscalar and interdisciplinary analysis approach. It must be in complete adherence with national and specific directives and objectives in all the different selected countries. The analysis of main literature and national and federal laws of Europe, United States and China allows the definition of the Strategic Objectives and Main Goals for Rural Development identifying indicators and criteria. They permit to measure intensification’s outcomes in a qualitative way through the description and interpretation of operative tools for architecture and landscape design. Finally, the organized database and the territorial results can be considered as guidelines to support decision makers in rural-urban context. In addition, the whole procedure presented along with the projects’ database is a significant research package for further interdisciplinary applications.

Keywords: rural–urban; interdisciplinary approach; evaluation and comparison (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/537/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/537/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:4:p:537-:d:94623

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().