igi global proof

20

Chapter 2

A Quantitative Methodological Approach for the Definition of the Urban Systems of Benevento and Salerno Massimiliano Bencardino University of Salerno, Italy

F O

O R

P L

A B

ABSTRACT

O L G

The aim of this chapter is to define two urban systems in the Campania region: The urban system of Salerno and that of Benevento. An analytical-descriptive method has been employed based on the geographical-territorial analysis of the urban fabric; clusters of indicators (indicators of urbanity) have also been used in order to reach, through the study of the relative thematic cartographies, a definition of urban space.

I G

I

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The aim of this paper is to reach a definition of two urban systems in the Campania region: the urban system of Salerno and that of Benevento1. Ever since the origin of the study of cities, geographers, together with other scholars of territorial disciplines, have focused on defining the territorial unit of analysis. Over time, and depending on the regions examined, the very definition of ‘city’ has varied considerably (Toschi, 1966), DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-1924-1.ch002

but a key element has always been the fact that a city is defined by the existing relationship between the urban and the rural. From the end of the seventies, a good many researchers have concentrated on defining models of development of the city, or models that represented the urban life cycle, with the purpose of explaining the halt in demographic and manufacturing growth - that had begun at that time - of the great urban areas in the United States and in Europe (Norton, 1979; Hall and Hay, 1980; van den Berg et al., 1982).

Copyright © 2013, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

A Quantitative Methodological Approach for the Definition of the Urban Systems of Benevento and Salerno

The considerable modifications undergone by existing cities and which occurred throughout the last century have placed the complexity of the urban phenomenon at the centre of attention. Phenomena such as the expansion of cities into spaces adjoining the traditional ones, the development along transport routes, the growth and development of suburbs, industrial decentralization together with the urban sprawl, have led to a need to redefine the physical space of the city. From 1981 to 1991 a foundational study was carried out on Local Job Systems (SLL) by Istat-Irpet. The novelty of this study lay in the identification of new units of survey made up of several adjacent municipalities, on the basis of daily work-related commuting. Other noteworthy studies (Bonavero, Dematteis, 1997) have further investigated the evolution and transformation of urban development by identifying, within the cities, the strategic territorial dimension needed to attain the objectives of social and economic cohesion and competitiveness. Other reference studies are, certainly, the work of geographers Murphy and Vance who proposed descriptive measures for delimiting the bondaries of Central Business District, leading to a descriptive model (Murphy et al., 1955) or the one of Scaramellini on the processes of economic growth and urban polarization (Scaramellini, 1991) or, more recently, the one of Bartaletti on urban metropolitan areas (Bartaletti, 2000). As regards urban development, a number of studies have focused their attention either on a single function or urban functional aspect, on several urban functions framed within a single analytical dimension, or, finally, on a plurality of functions and analytical dimensions (Bonavero, 1999). A new research approach to the urban phenomenon therefore no longer identifies cities as closed, hierarchically-ordained units, each with its own circle of influence, but as partial aggregations of specific correlated and interdependent activities; in this manner the ‘homogenization’ policies

F O

I

I G

O R

P L

A B

O L G

applied to the characteristics of the central areas are abandoned in favour of the exploitation of the specific vocations of each area; spatial-separation policies, such as zoning, are supplanted by the settlement principle of urban mix (mixité urbaine), with a multi-functional yet balanced offer of offices, housing, trades and services at different levels; there is, furthermore, a new awareness of the problems connected to urban form as a necessary complement to the overall design of a functional structure, with an eye to re-establishing the identity and the morphological characteristics of the urban fabric. Indeed, the functional organization of a city generally goes beyond its administrative borders, and this for a number of important aspects such as mobility, administrative and economic decentralization, sustainability, and the urban space takes on a number of characteristics which render a study on the scale of the urban region indispensable. In this way a new geography can be traced, that of the widespread city, taken to be an organism that carries out a variety of urban functions in relation to its context. For some time now, the European Community has focused its attention on urban systems in order to give life and support to sub-national, mid-range territorial areas, of the regional type, within which the systems of cities could reach the highest technological performances and capture the positive effects of innovations. A number of planning schemes and city development policies have been launched over the years such as those implemented by the Campania Region in the areas of “Urban Systems – City” (FAS 2005) and “Town - Urban systems” (FAS 2006-2009). Such schemes can also be found in the National Strategic Framework under “Competitiveness and attractiveness of cities and urban systems” (FAS 2007-2013). The difficulties encountered by this study, and likewise, the difficulties in implementing city development policies stem therefore from the differences between the administrative cor-

21


porate body of the city as such, and the territory which genuinely carries out urban functions. Even the comparative studies on the European urban system which held sway until the mid-nineties, did not develop further mainly due to the lack of a univocal definition of the concept of urban area at a Community level and, consequently, of harmonized statistical bases. Finally, it can be said that when taking the city as an object of study you must first of all define its dimensions, its peculiar and functional aspects, its strategic function within the space-territory in which it is set, both in relationship to the local network of the interconnected smaller centres, and within a supra-local net of higher functions in a polycentric space.

F O

O R

A QUANTITATIVE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH Research Objectives

I G

I

22

P L

A B

O L G

Through the interpretation of specific indicators, the analysis aims to define each urban system in relation to its territory and to verify whether the study can be attributed to one or more of the above-mentioned models. To define the scope of the study, which is to identify each of the possible urban systems in the region, has been primarily studied the region at the municipal level and at the census-scale level. Among the several urban systems in the Campania region, the urban system of Salerno and that of Benevento have been taken into consideration. Salerno is the second capital-city of the region after Naples and Benevento is the fourth, after Caserta. Due to the number of inhabitants, Benevento also represents the tenth municipality in Campania. The province of Salerno is, for territorial extension, the largest in the Campania region. It includes 150 municipalities with heterogeneous demographic characteristics: only 16 exceed 15’000 inhabitants, while the majority (109) have

a population of less than 5’000 inhabitants. The province of Benevento includes 78 municipalities, almost all small in size, of which only 3 exceed 10’000 inhabitants (Benevento 62’958; Montesarchio 13’541; Sant’Agata dei Goti 11’392). Overall, only 10 of the 78 municipalities have more than 5,000 inhabitants, 36 have populations of between 2’000 and 5’000 inhabitants and 32 have populations of less than 2’000 inhabitants. In both cases a significant proportion of the population has settled in rural areas, in isolated nucleuses and in scattered houses, thus, it was relatively easy to delineate the areas of the province with urban characteristics. Salerno and Benevento therefore fully represent the variety of systems in Campania, and are easier to analyze than the strip of conurbation that spreads from Naples to Caserta. They represent a useful starting point for a study that follows the evolution of urban development in the cities of the Campania region through an examination of evolutionary processes that have, in the last three decades, altered size, structure, boundaries, and relationships. The study also investigates whether the Salerno-Avellino-Benevento axis of development can be considered a valid alternative to the Neapolitan metropolitan area as an element of strategic regional balance.

The Analytical Method The study covers two different phases: a first analysis on a provincial level, and a successive one on the scale of the urban system being considered. This work led to the creation of a database, that is, consequently, organized on two territorial levels, as explained in the succeeding image (Figure 1). The first phase, which could be defined “by exclusion”, focuses on the study of the housing continuum and the proximity/accessibility of places, it is carried out by means of the analysis of demographic data together with a series of thematic maps at the municipal level (using data for the whole provincial territory from the last


Figure 1. Database schema

F O

population census) and by reading orthophotos on a scale of 1:10.000 from 1998 (compared with more recent satellite images with a similar spatial resolution). At this stage the reading of specific indicators allows for the territorial definition of the urban system, it highlights those municipalities which present values markedly different from the provincial average, together with the territorial areas (groups of municipalities) with values of scarce proximity from those of the central municipality. The reasoning behind this kind of analysis stems from the consideration that an urban area presents different indicators of development from its periphery and therefore has values (positive or negative) which are higher than the rest of the territory. The second phase of the investigation, which could be defined ‘by definition’, specifically concerns the local context not excluded from the first stage, and is carried out on the scale of the census with the aim to reach, with greater spatial accuracy, a definition of the urban system. In order to arrive at a definition and qualification of the urban system, a number of variables are employed, and several indicators (Indicators

P L

A B

I

I G

O L G

O R

of urbanity) are developed, some on a municipal scale, such as credit (Banks), research and development (Directors of corporations, Research and development, Accounting, Financial Advisory, Work consulting, Notaries), consultancy, transport (Travel agencies, Transport companies), financial intermediation, real estate activity, health services of various kinds, trade, hotels and catering and public services of various types from waste disposal services to cultural and recreational services (Waste disposal, Television activities, Libraries, Museums, Clubs, Sports, Sporting Events); and others on the scale of the census, such as: Entrepreneurs, Graduates, Senior citizens, High School leavers, the Illiterate, Farmers, Workers. It has been assumed that the values of the municipal level indicators do not differ significantly from those related to the areas of each municipality, falling within the given urban system. Indeed, the settlements that do not fit into the urban area (fractions, nucleuses and scattered houses) have a rural type destination and only rarely contain structures that provide goods and services. Thus, it is correct to assert that goods and services are situated within the delimited urban area and at the same time interest the whole urban population. As

23


shown in the following cartographic excerpts, a high percentage of the population is concentrated in the urban area, averaging around 80-90%, of the total of each municipality. The excerpts which follow concern the areas of Nocera Inferiore and Nocera Superiore (Figure 2(a)) where the resident population in the urban area is more than 80% for Nocera Inferiore and more than 90% for Nocera Superiore, and the areas of Battipaglia and Bellizzi (Figure 2(b)) where the resident population in the urban area is more than 90%. The indicators taken into account can also be weighed on a regional and national scale, as well as in relation to the great Italian statistic partitions (South, Islands, Centre, Northwest, Northeast) and to the Local Job Systems or to other urban aggregations. For the urban system being considered, it is therefore possible to measure the deviation from the average values of the indicated statistical partitions. Hence, the urban system is not only locally qualified, by identifying the “core” and the various suburbs, but also weighed against several statistical regions. The processing of maps, therefore, provides interesting information on the local availability of services in relation to that which is present in varying degrees in other territorial realities. The manifold mapping scenarios that stem from the comparison with different statistic realities implies the construction of clusters, organized in matrixes (Matrixes of urban efficiency). Whenever a comparison is established between the urban systems, object of this study and other statistical partitions (Campania, Southern Italy, other urban systems, etc...) there is a corresponding matrix, within which each municipality is assigned a value for each of the selected urban indicators. In the following Figure (Figure 3) an excerpt of one of these matrixes is represented, the columns present lists of the indicators of urban efficiency (the Indicators of urbanity mentioned above), identified by a progressive number, and the rows presents the municipalities that are part of the selected urban system.

I G

I

24

The clusters are, therefore, implemented using three different methods of classification of the municipalities: the method of prevalence, the method of correct prevalence, the method of weighed values. The method of prevalence requires that each municipality be mainly classified according to the predominance of the value of the indicators, to which a colour is assigned in the matrix (red for below-average values, green for above-average values and yellow for the values in line with the average). The method calculates the prevalence of the colours. The method of correct prevalence differs from the former as it allows a better distribution of the municipalities among the classes. This is achieved by applying some correctives to the equations that regulate the previous method. Such correctives derive from an accurate analysis of the data and act upon data that straddle multiple classes, allowing a better and more flexible distribution of the data and, therefore, a more detailed mapping. The method of weighed values assigns a score to each indicator, classifying municipalities on the basis of the sum of the scores assigned to indicators. With the aim of offering a greater scope for analysis, cartographies have been drawn up using all three methods. Among these, the most congruent method for the case under consideration is then selected. Both in the case of the urban system of Salerno (Figure 3), and in that of the urban system of Benevento, the method of correct prevalence has been used. To better understand this mode of analysis of the urban system, the underlying assumptions of the methodologies employed will now be illustrated.

F O

O R

P L

O L G

A B

Methods of Classification To compare the value of the i-th indicator of the urban system municipalities (which represents the sample) with those of the other statistical partitions (which is the statistical population) the values of the sample had to be indexed.


Figure 2. Excerpts of the urban system of Salerno: Nocera Inferiore and Nocera Superiore (a), Bellizzi and Battipaglia (b).

F O

O R

P L

A B

I

I G

O L G

Figure 3. Excerpt of a matrix of urban efficiency

25


The basic assumption is that the behaviour of each indicator follows a Gaussian trend. Therefore, given each municipal indicator, which in our case represents the variable X(i), and with a known average µx(i) and variance σ2x(i) of the same indicator for the reference population, the following variable is drawn: Zi =

X i − µx (i ) σ(i )

(1)

municipality according to the predominance among the indicators. The classification of synthesis foresees 5 classes in this case, which qualify the state of the municipality on the basis of the supply of services. To obtain prevalence, the logical functions described below have been imposed upon the cluster (Table 1). Some correctives may be brought to the equations that regulate the previous method and make up the second method, the method of correct prevalence.

F O

This function returns a normalized Gaussian variable with a trend in which µz=0 e σ2z=1. This new function f (Z) (Figure 4) will be equal to: f (Z ) =

1 σ 2π

−Z 2

e

2σ2

=

1 2π

e

−Z 2 2

I

26

O R

P L

(2)

This function determines a normalized Gaussian. So by referring to a given classification (green = above-average value, yellow = in line with average, red = below-average value), and by assigning to 68.3% of cases the possibility of being in line with the average of the population, it can be said that when the variable Zi assumes values greater than 1, the colour green will be assigned to the indicator Xi, when the variable Zi assumes values inferior to -1, the colour red will be assigned to the indicator Xi, whereas when the variable Zi takes on values in the range (-1, +1), the colour yellow will be assigned to the indicator Xi. The aim is to assign a synthetic value (yellow, red, green) to the indicator of each municipality compared with the other statistical partitions. In order to carry out the synthesis maps, as has previously been mentioned, three different methods of classification have been employed: the method of prevalence, the method of correct prevalence, the method of weighed values. The method of prevalence responds to the necessity to seek out the most frequent value (colour) in the cluster, in order to classify each

I G

Figure 4. Deviation from the reference population, with Gaussian trends

A B

O L G

Table 1. Table of logical functions IF

THEN

Green > Red + Yellow

Assign class “Municipality with high supply of services”

Green < Red + Yellow AND Yellow > Red

Assign class “Municipality with medium-high supply of services”

Yellow > Green + Red OR Red > Yellow AND Green > Yellow

Assign class “Municipality with average supply of services”

Red < Green + Yellow AND Yellow > Green

Assign class “Municipality with medium-low level supply of services”

Red > Green + Yellow

Assign class “Municipality with low supply of services”


The correctives can make the equations in Table 1 less restrictive by adjusting the functions of equations of majority to greater-equal (≥) or by applying a +1 to the function [Green > Red + Yellow +1]. Such correctives allow for the observation, at the end of the process, of a better distribution of municipalities among the classes. A second type corrective is thus constituted by the addition of a further class provided by the following logical formula illustrated in Table 2. In this way it is possible to highlight situations of particular gravity in which the number of red indicators clearly prevails and therefore, taking the standard Gaussian (Figure 3) as reference, there is a queue of probability that shows an exceptional lack of services. A third method is that of weighed values. This last method approaches the problem differently, assigning a weight to every indicator. The value is ‘2’ if the indicator is represented by the colour green (above-average), ‘1’ if the indicator is represented by the colour yellow, and ‘0’ if the indicator is represented by the colour red. To each municipality, therefore, will correspond a sum value of the weights assigned to the single indicator; in relation to which the municipality will be classified.

Table 2. Corrective to the logical functions IF Red > 2 * (Green + Yellow)

I G

I

Synthetic Mapping: A Definition of Urban Systems

Useful indications for the connotation of urban systems derive from the cartographical scenarios obtained by means of clusters. The Salerno urban system (Figure 5) is made up of a superior level urban area, which comprises the city of Salerno and three main thoroughfares, the first crosses the Irno Valley, the second leads from Pontecagnano to Eboli, the third leads to Cava dei Tirreni, together with two peripheral systems which can be defined by their geographical position: median, from Nocera Superiore to Angri, and internal, from Mercato San Severino to Sarno.

Assign class “Municipality with a poor supply of services”

Only 232 municipalities are part of the urban system; they represent 56.77% of the population of the entire province. The settlements of the Vallo di Diano have never been considered an autonomous urban system, the so-called ‘Città del Vallo’, which even the Territorial Plan for Provincial Coordination (Piano Territoriale di Coordinamento Provinciale) only considers to be a settlement still to be consolidated with the development of new urban centralities. The centre of Scafati has, furthermore, been excluded from the Salerno urban system, this is due both to the noticeable discontinuity of housing settlements, and to the consolidated gravitation towards Naples and other coastal towns. A further element to take into account, lies in the fact that some of the municipalities of the Salerno urban system, and markedly the two western peripheral thoroughfares, also gravitate, albeit partially, towards Naples and the other municipalities present in the Gulf. As for the functional qualification of the system in question, it must be said, briefly, that in comparison to the Campania region and Southern and Insular Italy, the Salerno urban system is characterized by a good or reasonably satisfactory level of urban efficiency, whereas compared to the statistical partitions of the Centre and North of Italy, the level is low. The Salerno urban system presents a varied scenario, with the city of Salerno standing out distinctly compared to the other parts of the system. It presents above-average values not only in relation to the Campania region and Southern and Insular Italy, but also compared to Italy as a whole and to the Central regions. Compared, however, to north-western and north-

F O

O R

P L

A B

O L G

THEN

27


Figure 5. Salerno urban system

F O

eastern Italy, Salerno presents an offer of services, and therefore a level of urban efficiency, which is average or lower than average. The Benevento urban system (Figure 6) is made up of a superior level urban area, which comprises the town of Benevento, the three main thoroughfares (Caudina, Benevento-Ceppaloni-Arpaise and Medio Calore), and an area of widespread development (called the territorial area of widespread settlement development) to the south-east of the town. The urban system also comprises two peripheral systems, which can be defined on the basis of their geographical position: the north-west and the north east peripheral system; both are positioned along thoroughfares characterized by active, ongoing development. On the basis of the previously mentioned characteristics, the system appears as a “Urban structure in a radial pattern or constellation” which, to varying degrees, involves the municipal areas of the 20 municipalities3 considered; collectively they represent about 40% of the population of the entire province. Within this analytical context, it must be mentioned that the municipality of Montesarchio presents – as is evident in the cartography, but

I G

I

28

O R

P L

also in the Regional Territorial Plan – the features of a relatively autonomous area enriched by aspects of urban development which make it attractive to the contiguous municipalities (belonging to the same province such as Bonea, Paolisi, Tocco Caudio, Campoli di Monte Taburno, but also belonging to the province of Avellino such as Cervinara and San Martino Valle Caudina). Montesarchio can therefore be excluded from the Benevento urban system. A few rapid considerations can be expressed regarding the characteristics of the Benevento urban system. First of all, it must be said that the inhabitants of the historical centre are for the most part elderly compared to the population of the residential areas to the south and south-east of the city and the areas to the south of Benevento and along some of the thoroughfares. This phenomenon can be viewed as a residential dislocation of recently-formed families from the centre to the new residential areas and towards the suburbs; it can be considered a process of suburbanisation. The number of agricultural workers is, moreover, considerably lower than the provincial average throughout most of the urban system, and,

O L G

A B


Figure 6. Benevento urban system

F O

likewise, more people are employed in the tertiary sector especially in the superior level urban area. A significant number of entrepreneurs and self-employed professionals are present throughout the entire urban system and in the suburbs. Compared to the provincial average, a conspicuous number of businesses connected to the building trade (both production and commerce) point to an intense activity which confirms the building boom in the area. The lower cost of land and the greater availability of space have brought about the recent localization of industrial activities (areas devoted to consortiums for the development of industrial activities), services (structures for the handling and storage of goods) and tertiary activities (multiplex cinemas and the restaurant trade) in areas close to Benevento and in contiguous municipalities.

P L

A B

I G

I

O L G

CONCLUSION Reading the indicators have confirmed that not the entire urban system has characteristics of urbanity, although there is a housing continuity. The system, as shown by detailed maps that for brevity can not be represented here, certainly has

O R

a core, more developed and with more services, and peripheral areas, with fewer services and more marginalized. All the examined factors serve to confirm the fact that the study can be traced back to a classical urban-rural model. Such a wealth of initiatives in the superior level urban area cannot but provoke a polarizing effect not only on the local context but also throughout the provincial territory. Finally, the resulting systems was compared to the local occupational systems analysed by Istat in 2001 through a re-elaboration of various data typologies, especially those obtained by means of a survey of the work force at a municipal level. The result of this comparison illustrates that, though the initial considerations are different, the municipalities present in the local occupational system are the same as those identified by the present study. This goes to show that there is a close relationship between functional specializations (makeup of population, educational background, fields of activity, services) and the daily mobility for occupational reasons. A subsequent study could affect the functional connotation of the axis of development SalernoAvellino-Benevento on the basis of functional polarization that emerges from these studies. 29


REFERENCES Bartaletti, F. (2000). Le aree metropolitane italiane: Un’analisi geografica. Genova, Italy: Bozzi.

Bencardino, M. (2009). Il sistema urbano di Benevento. In D’Aponte, T. (Ed.), Il Cavallo di Troia: L’assalto alla città tra politiche incoerenti, innovazione territoriale incompiuta, crisi di vivibilità urbana. Roma, Italy: Aracne Editrice.

Bonavero, P. (2000). Traiettorie della ricerca urbana. In S.Conti & C. Salone (Eds.), Il sistema urbano europeo fra gerarchia e policentrismo. Torino, Working Paper Eupolis. Bonavero, P., & De Matteis, G. (1989). Il sistema urbano italiano nello spazio unificato Europeo. Bologna, Italy: il Mulino.

ENDNOTES 1

F O

Hall, P., & Hay, D. (1980). Growth centers in the European urban system. London.

O R

Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. (2001). 8° censimento dell’industria e dei servizi. Roma, Italy: Author. Norton, R. D. (1966). City life-cycles and American urban policy. New York, NY: Academic Press. Scaramellini, G. (Ed.). (1991). Città e poli metropolitani in Italia. Milano, Italy: F. Angeli.

I G

van Den Bergh, L., et al. (1982). Urban Europe; A study of growth and decline. London.

I

ADDITIONAL READING

Bencardino, M. (2007). Qualità della vita nel sistema urbano salernitano: Organizzazione del database e clusterizzazione. In La Foresta, D. (Ed.), Scenari territoriali del governo della sostenibilità e dello sviluppo urbano (2nd ed.). Roma, Italy: Aracne Editore.

30

P L

A B

O L G

Toschi, U. (1966). La città. Geografia urbana. Torino, Italy: Utet.

This research stems from a project, initiated in 2006, which aimed to define the urban systems in the Campania region. The study project was born in a context of a P.R.I.N and focused on the sustainable development of urban ecosystems. It was successively carried out in a context of two F.A.R.B. projects (University Funds for Basic Research - ex 60%), and, to date, cannot be considered concluded. Salerno, Pontecagnano, Faiano, Montecorvino Pugliano, Bellizzi, Battipaglia, Eboli, Vietri sul mare, Cava de’ Tirreni, Nocera Inferiore, Nocera Superiore, Pagani, Sant’Egidio del M. Albino, Angri, San Marzano sul Sarno, San Valentino Torio, Sarno, Siano, Castel San Giorgio, Mercato San Severino, Fisciano, Baronissi, Pellezzano. Benevento, Apollosa, San Leucio del Sannio, Ceppaloni, Arpaise, Sant’Angelo a Cupolo, San Nicola Manfredi, S. Giorgio del Sannio, Calvi, San Nazzaro, Cstelpoto, Ponte, Torrecuso, Foglianise, Vitulano, Cautano, Paduli, Apice, Pietrelcina.

2

3