The pilot area of Auronzo di Cadore (Belluno) - Università Ca

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fig. 21 Weight elicitation exercise Tab. 17 Outcome of collective weighting snow availability in Auronzo was described, as a driving factors for the development of the resort’s winter offer (Table 16). The reader may notice the difference in changes of snow days between Misurina and Auronzo, due primarily to the higher altitude of the former. The workshop then turned to individual weight elicitation exercise (Figure 21). 48 CRITERIA Each stakeholder has 100 points to allocate among the criteria; the highest score goes to the most important criteria, and the total must add up to 100. Although this methodology is more vulnerable to individual biases than the previously utilised SIMOS, in terms of time needed to calculate the result and insert them into the ClimAlpTour e-tool, this one is much faster, hence suitable to the half-day workshop. As it appears from Table 17, the macro-criteria, which describe impacts on local economy, scored the highest marks (score 26.31), whereas environmental criteria such as energy consumption and total garbage disposal did not seem to preoccupy stakeholders to any significant extent (score 8.25). CRITERIA’S SCORES Environmental impact 19.06 Economic costs with environmental relevance 8.25 Impact on local economy 26.31 Impact on tourist sector 16.19 Strategy feasibility 9.19 INDICATORS INDICATORS’ WEIGHTS (%) Erosion 8.17 Air quality 8.17 Visibility 8.17 Water consumption for snow-making 8.17 Total garbage disposal 3.54 Energy consumption 3.54 Tourists' expenditures 11.28 Labour tourist sector 11.28 Erosion 6.94 Tourists' peaks 6.94 Synergies with summer tourism 6.94 CSI affected 3.94 Investment costs 3.94 Long-term sustainability 11.56 Long-term sustainability 4.96 Innovativeness 9.44 Innovativeness 4.05
Fig. 22 Results of strategies’ evaluation with the ClimAlpTour e-tool 6.1.1 / Results of strategies’ assessments and discussion on outcomes The insertion of individual weights into the ClimAlpTour e-tool permitted us to rank the strategies according to collective judgements for the three chosen climate scenarios (Figure 22) and view the result in histogram- and sustainability-triangle shapes (Figure 23; Figure 24). This was highly beneficial for the stakeholders, as they could easily get a feeling of what strategy dominated and why. 49 Figure 23 illustrates the histograms, whose height resulted from the strategies’ evaluation. Each represents one strategy, whilst the different colours represent how the various indicators contribute to the final outcome. Similarly, Figure 24 exemplifies the sustainability chart of the four strategies. The inner triangle is the ideal area, in which a strategy should be spotted, as a consequence of the good balance among the environmental, the social and the economic dimensions. The results represented here partly depend on the structure of the selected evaluative criteria, which reflect primarily the economic and environmental issues rather than the social one, in accordance with the stakeholders’ priorities. Given the current indicator structure, the second-best choice (ALTSKI) appears to be slightly more sustainable than the preferred one (BYDSNW). Overall, the preferred strategy resulted to be BYDSNW for the three climate scenarios. As shown in Figure 23, this development strategy seems more suited for Auronzo di Cadore, compared to the others, due to several factors: 1. long term sustainability; 2. synergies with the summer tourism; 3. capacity of incrementing the arrivals and tourist’s expenditures. ALTSKI is robustly performing as the second-best option, showing higher appropriateness in the “current” and “B1” climate scenario. A more extreme future with considerable less snow precipitations may significantly penalize this strategy. A SKINT strategy results to be particularly deficient in terms of investment costs and environmental impacts, but it would be desirable in terms of creation of job opportunities, increase of tourists’ expenditure and containment of seasonality. This result did not seem to surprise the majority of participants, notwithstanding the fact that during the first workshop the participants attributed the highest importance, in terms of influence in the choice of an alpine destination, to snow-related activities (see Table 11). Hence, one may con-
Page 1: Climate change and its impacts on t
Page 4 and 5: work group Balbi S. 1,2 , Bonzanigo
Page 6 and 7: 5.1.4 5.2 6 6.1 6.1.1 6.2 6.3 7 Fig
Page 8 and 9: Preface The mountain area of the Ve
Page 10 and 11: 1 / Introduction: the ClimAlpTour p
Page 12 and 13: Fig. 1 Project’s structure for st
Page 14 and 15: Box 1 The report in brief 2 / Venet
Page 16 and 17: Fig. 3 The Three Peaks of Lavaredo
Page 18 and 19: conceived during the EU FP5 project
Page 20 and 21: culating environmental indicators,
Page 22 and 23: Box 2 SNA in brief 3 / Phase 1 / Ac
Page 24 and 25: (3) As it appears, tourists were ex
Page 26 and 27: Tab. 4 Characteristics of Auronzo
Page 28 and 29: Tab. 6 List of actors to invite to
Page 30 and 31: Box 3 Participatory development of
Page 32 and 33: Fig. 8 GIS map of areas of interest
Page 34 and 35: Fig. 10 Strategy SKINT after brains
Page 36 and 37: Tab. 10 Factors characterising wint
Page 38 and 39: Box 4 DSS design in brief 5 / Phase
Page 40 and 41: CLIMATE SCENARIO Tab. 13 CURRENT A1
Page 42 and 43: Fig. 15 Example of Google Earth bas
Page 44 and 45: 5.1.3 / Agent-Based Model (AWS1.0 )
Page 46 and 47: Fig. 17 ClimAlpTour e-tool’s cata
Page 48 and 49: Fig. 20 Indicators’ clustering 46
Page 52 and 53: Fig. 23 Strategies ranking after we
Page 54 and 55: the need of defining a commonly agr
Page 56 and 57: ponentially increased the number of
Page 58: References 56 Balbi et al. (2011).

The pilot area of Auronzo di Cadore (Belluno) - Università Ca

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?