14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
THE LANDSCAPE UNITS AS TOLLS PLANNING
Interactions between anthropic activity and natural resources as projectual question
Stefania CAIAZZO, Ines ALBERICO, Immacolata APREDA, Alessandro DAL PIAZ and Massimo
FAGNANO
University of Napoli Federico II
This paper presents the results of several studies (in course of elaboration at CIRAM)
directed to integrate different data (agronomic, geo-morphological and landscape
data) from Naples Province Territorial Plan (PTCP), to define Landscape Units (LU)
for the construction of an ecological regional network.
The methodology for the definition of the Landscape Units is based on a complex
concept of landscape: the landscape results an multi-integrated interaction between
anthropic and natural factors.
In this perspective, the Landscape Units are intended as complexes territorial areas
to which the constituent elements, also heterogeneous, confer a specific identity and
image as a consequence of the relation systems between them and that determine
the formation and the evolution of Landscape Units.
The Landscape Units methodology suggests the hypothesis that different disciplinary
analyses can be independently developed, with technical and specific criteria, to
construct a multidisciplinary integrated scheme, where complex and integrated
appraisals try to recognize the interactions between the various components.
KEYWORDS
Naples province, geological zones, landscape planning, landscape units, territorial complexity
INTRODUCTION
The produced studies represent the preliminary elaborations to integrate the Naples Coordinating
Territorial Planning (PTCP) contents, concerning the pedological, agronomical, environmental and
landscape components, according to:
planning course expressed in the “Linee guida per la pianificazione territoriale regionale”
[“Guide lines for the regional territorial planning“].
preliminary methodological indications elaborated by the Regione Campania in order to give a
landscape importance to the territorial plans for the provincial coordination.
contents of the “Codice dei beni culturali e del paesaggio“[“Code of the cultural resources and
the landscape“], according to the report of the European Convention on the landscape.
These integrated and multidisciplinary studies represent the preliminary steps to the reconstruction of
the Landscape Units and to constitute the provincial ecological system. This research and the
developed elaborations have been included in a process of progressive integration of necessary
knowledge to conform the PTCP to the following objects:
-
protection and valorization of agricultural and forestal resources;
definition of standards for the constitution of the provincial ecological system, connected with
the regional one and in compliance with the regulations of the Regional Territorial Plan (PTR)
regional trends;
landscape planning, so that the PTCP can have the value and efficacy as a landscape plan, in
conformity with the last national and regional legislative provisions.
These goals include principles and indications according to the “Convenzione europea sul paesaggio”
[“European landscape Convention”] and the law provisions about the landscape planning by which
landscape planning and management are taken back to responsibility for the choices and for the actions
of territorial transformation and development. As a consequence it has become a necessity to insert
specific components for landscape analysis, interpretation and planning in the creation of territorial and
town plans.
According to assumed aims, it has been followed a study system to analysis and to interpret the
landscape as follow:
the first one is developed in relation to single topics;
the second one, by locating and considering relations between different topics and different
territorial components. It synthesizes analytical and interpretative elaborations and gives a
proposal for the provincial territorial articulation in areas where Landscape Units are identified.
1
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
It may be given a first analysis and interpretation of constitutive characters of provincial territory,
referring to different territorial and landscape components. The investigated subjects are about:
geological and geomorphological characterization;
territorial classification;
characteristics of agricultural and natural areas;
installation system and landscape.
It is important to remember that studies about characteristics of agricultural and natural areas have a
particular importance for the plan contents integration. The huge analysis of a variable dataset makes
possible not only to complete knowledge, in the aim of town-planning adjustment and in relation to plan
landscape value, but also to form effective strategies for the agricultural production valorization based
on a reliable table of resources and of potentiality. The construction of provincial ecological network
based on the regional one is the aim of this study, too.
This first stage of this methodological study is based on the analysis of the single topics to individuate
the provincial landscape structural elements.
The second stage uses Landscape Units to explain territory in relation to the landscape qualities
tutelage, recovery and valorization. In literature and in planning documents there are different definitions
of Landscape Units, but its main meaning - widely shared - recognizes the Landscape Units as a whole
territorial area to which constitutive components give a specific identity and image, due to the relations
among them which have caused its making and development.
This Landscape Units meaning refers to latest elaborations to the European Union ambient principles
and to landscape meaning stated in the European Convention 2000, but also to last two ten-years
periods of theoretic elaborations and planning experiences that reformed territorial interpretation and
relations between the territorial dynamics and the local community action.
The combination of analytical and interpretative elaborations, in relation to single topics, produced a first
orientation scheme for individuation of Landscape Units and of specific components which identify and
distinguish an area from the others.
GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF NAPLES PROVINCE: DEFINITION OF GEOLOGICAL ZONES
The Naples Province area, even if characterized by a limited extension, has a remarkable lithologic and
geomorphologic variability, mainly due to the coexistence of both volcanic (Campi Flegrei and Vesuvio
volcanic areas) and sedimentary environments (limestone relief of Capri island, Sorrento Peninsula,
Palma Campania and Roccarainola mountains). This particular geological framework has made very
difficult the identification and the classification of Geological Zones which characterize the landscape
Units.
A step by step approach has been used to define these Zones: first) collection and analysis of
environmental data (geolithology, geomorphology, altimetry, slope, permeability, aquifer vulnerability,
slope stability, seismic vulnerability, volcanic hazard and subsurface vulnerability); second) data
semplification and generation of monothematic maps; third) creation of partial integrated maps based on
the monothematic maps elaborated in the previous steps (Physiographic Units map, vulnerability
environmental and morphology maps) and fourth) generation of a final integrated map, as a combination
of partial integrated maps.
In the first step, the collected environmental data have been organized in a Geographic Information
System to find out a distinctive relation existing between them through the use of spatial analysis. The
overlap of part of data has shown the generation of complex map due to the huge quantity of
heterogenic data presented in each of ones. As a consequence, two distinct factors have been used to
simplify the environmental data and to realize monothematic maps with a reduced number of classes:
the map scale (1:25.000) and the reclassification concept.
Secondly, data simplification based on the scale concept has been uniformly applied on the spatial
elements of all the environmental data through the union of polygons with a limited extension to its
neighbourhood greater extended. On the contrary the simplification of data, based on the reclassification
concept, has changed in relation to the environmental data type analysed.
Thirdly, geolithological, altimetry and slope data have been analysed and reclassified to define the
Physiographic Units, which can be considered the fundamental elements in the recognition of
Geological Zones and their relationships.
2
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
In detail, from the Naples Province Geolithological map [4], following the lithology reclassification
concept, 11 geolithological units has been defined lumped together classes with same lithology but
related to different time periods.
The altimetry data, classified in 3 classes: plain (0-100 m), hill (100-600 m) and mountain (>600 m),
have allowed us the identification of:
Both coastal and internal plains;
Campi Flegrei and the Somma-Vesuvio volcanic areas;
Topographic relief of Capri and Ischia Islands and the different limestone-highs cropping out in
the southern (Massa Lubrense, Sorrento, Piano di Sorrento, S.Agnello, Meta e Parte di Vico
Equense) and the northern sector (Vico Equense, Rimonte, Agevola, Gragnano e Lettere) of
the Sorrento Peninsula and also the Palma Campania and Roccarainola mountains bordering
the Campanian Plain.
The slope data have been classified in 4 classes to show the difference between the flat area (plain
zones) and the high slope characterizing a lot of limestone and volcanic hillsides: <15°, 15°-30°, 30°45°, >45°.
The Physiographic Units have been generate using the geometric intersection and the prevailing
concepts. In particular, the data related to the 11 geolithological units and to the 3 altimetry classes have
been intersected generating 27 Physiographic Units (FIG.1, TAB.1), while the slope data have been
joined to each Physiographic Units as mean slope.
Fig. 1 : Naples Province Physiographic Units.
Physiographic
Unit
PU1
PU2
PU3
PU4
PU5
Description
Alternation of whitish siltstones locally fossiliferous, elevation range 0-100, mean slope 15°30°
Alternation of whitish siltstones locally fossiliferous, elevation range 100-600, mean slope
15°-30°
Alternation of clayey marly sandstone and coarse-grained sandstone, elevation range 0100, mean slope ≤15°
Alternation of clayey marly sandstone and coarse-grained sandstone, elevation range 100600, mean slope ≤15°
Limestones and calcarenites of Sorrento Peninsula and Avella Mountains, elevation range
0-100, mean slope =30°
PU6
Limestones and calcarenites of Sorrento Peninsula and Avella Mountains, elevation range
100-600, mean slope =30°
PU7
Limestones and calcarenites of Sorrento Peninsula and Avella Mountains, elevation range
>600, mean slope =30°
3
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
PU8
Alluvial, marshy and beach deposits of the coastal zone and intra-crateric planes, elevation
range 0-100, mean slope ≤15°
PU9
Alluvial, marshy and beach deposits of the coastal zone and intra-crateric planes, elevation
range 100-600, mean slope ≤15°
PU10
Pediment and fan detrital deposits, elevation range 0-100, mean slope ≤15°
PU11
Pediment and fan detrital deposits, elevation range 100-600, mean slope ≤15°
PU12
Pediment and fan detrital deposits, elevation range >600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU13
Matrix supported pyroclastic deposits mix to fragments of sedimentary deposits with chaotic
texture, elevation range 0-100, mean slope ≤15°
PU14
Matrix supported pyroclastic deposits mix to fragments of sedimentary deposits with chaotic
texture, elevation range 100-600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU15
Matrix supported pyroclastic deposits mix to fragments of sedimentary deposits with chaotic
texture, elevation range >600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU16
Pyroclastic deposits, volcanic dome, lava and dykes, elevation range 0-100, mean slope
≤15°
PU17
Pyroclastic deposits, volcanic dome, lava and dykes, elevation range 100-600, mean slope
≤15°
F18
PU19
Pyroclastic deposits, elevation range 0-100, mean slope 15°-30°
Pyroclastic deposits, elevation range 100-600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU20
Pyroclastic deposits, elevation range >600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU21
Lavas, elevation range 0-100, mean slope ≤15°
PU22
Lavas, elevation range 100-600, mean slope ≤15°
PU23
Lavas, elevation range >600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU24
Travertine, elevation range 0-100, mean slope ≤15°
PU25
Tuff, elevation range 0-100, mean slope ≤15°
PU26
Tuff, elevation range 100-600, mean slope 15°-30°
PU27
Tuff, elevation range >600, mean slope 15°-30°
Tab. 1: Physiographic Units description
For each Physiographic Units have been also recognized and classified the geomorphological elements
in the following two main classes: primary and subordinate morphological shapes (FIG.2).
The main types of hazard, affecting the study area, have been also used (aquifer vulnerability, slope
stability, seismic vulnerability, volcanic hazard and subsurface vulnerability) to indicate the territorial
vulnerability for each Geological Zones.
The aquifer vulnerability data have been acquired to the Aquifer vulnerability map elaborated in 1998 [3]
where the Naples Province area has been subdivided in 4 classes:
High vulnerability,
Medium vulnerability,
Low vulnerability,
Not defined vulnerability.
The slope stability data have been acquired from the Landslide location map [5] where the Province of
Naples area has been subdivided in 9 classes, each ones characterized by a predominant landslide
type and/or erosional event.
The seismic vulnerability data have been record by the new seismic classification defined by decision n.
5547 of 7 November 2002 of Giunta della Regione Campania. This classification subdivided the study
area in 2 zones.
4
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
Fig.2: Morphological elements describing the Naples Province landscape
with seismic index equal to 3 and equal to 2 for the Sorrento Peninsula and Capri island and for all the
other Naples Province municipalities, respectively. (Fig.3)
The subsurface vulnerability has been evaluated considering only the presence or the absence of
cavities [1, 2, 6]. This information has been joined to each municipality (FIG.3).
5
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
The volcanic vulnerability data have been detected by the volcanic vulnerability map [8, 9] where the
areas subjected to the Somma-Vesuvio and the Campi Flegrei activity have been classified in three
classes:
High volcanic vulnerability, for the area close to the Somma- Vesuvio volcano;
Low and/or Medium volcanic vulnerability, for the area between the Somma-Vesuvio volcano
and the Roccarainola, Palma Campania and Sorrento Peninsula limestone relief;
Medium high volcanic vulnerability for the Campi Flegrei area located inside the caldera zone.
The vulnerability types analysed are different, mainly for the occurrence of considered events as a
consequence it has been useful: a) to summarize the slope instability, the aquifer vulnerability and the
subsurface vulnerability by the geometric intersection; b) to overlay the previous map to the volcanic and
seismic vulnerability map to join this information to the new zones generated in the previous step.
The Naples Province integrated vulnerability map obtained by these two steps is characterized by the
following 26 classes (FIG.3; TAB.3):
Fig.3: Integrated vulnerability map
Code
1
2
3
4
Territorial vulnerability
High aquifer vulnerability; medium volcanic hazard in the Somma-Vesuvio area, seismic index = 2;
presence of cavities.
High aquifer vulnerability; tuff fall; seismic index= 2 except for the Sorrento Peninsula zones
characterized by a seismic index= 3; presence of cavities.
High aquifer vulnerability; falls along the deepening valleys; seismic index= 2 except for the Sorrento
Peninsula zones characterized by a seismic index= 3; presence of cavities.
High aquifer vulnerability; high frequency of debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits and rock fall;
medium volcanic hazard in the Somma-Vesuvio area and low volcanic hazard in Sorrento Peninsula
and in Roccarainola municipality; seismic index= 2 except for the Sorrento Peninsula zones
characterized by a seismic index= 3; presence of cavities.
6
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
| Tomar, Portugal
High aquifer vulnerability; high frequency of debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits, rock fall and
complex landslide in flysch; seismic index= 3; presence of cavities.
High aquifer vulnerability; tuff and lava falls; seismic index= 2; presence of cavities.
High aquifer vulnerability; erosional and/or solid transport events; high volcanic hazard; seismic
index= 2; presence of cavities
High aquifer vulnerability; high frequency of debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits, tuff fall; mediumhigh volcanic hazard in the Campi Flegrei area; seismic index= 2; presence of cavities.
High aquifer vulnerability; debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits and flysch, rock fall; seismic index=
3.
Low aquifer vulnerability; seismic index= 2
Low aquifer vulnerability; high frequency of debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits and rock fall;
seismic index = 3.
Low aquifer vulnerability; debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits, rock fall and complex landslide in
flysch; seismic index = 3; presence of cavities.
Low aquifer vulnerability; erosional and/or solid transport events; high volcanic hazard; seismic index
= 2.
Low aquifer vulnerability; debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits, tuff fall; medium-high volcanic
hazard in the Campi Flegrei area; seismic index = 2; presence of cavities.
Low aquifer vulnerability; debris flows in the pyroclastic deposits and flysch, rock fall; seismic index =
3.
Medium aquifer vulnerability; medium volcanic hazard in the Somma-Vesuvio area and medium-high
in the Campi Flegrei area; seismic index = 2; presence of cavities
Medium aquifer vulnerability; tuff landslide; seismic index = 3
Medium aquifer vulnerability; falls along the deepening valleys; low volcanic hazard in the
Roccarainola municipality; seismic index = 2 except for the Sorrento Peninsula zones characterized
by a seismic index= 3; presence of cavities
Medium aquifer vulnerability; debris flow in the pyroclastic deposits and rock fall; medium volcanic
hazard in the Somma-Vesuvio area and low volcanic hazard in the Sorrento Peninsula; seismic
index = 2 except for the Sorrento Peninsula zones characterized by a seismic index= 3; presence of
cavities
Medium aquifer vulnerability; debris flow in the pyroclastic deposits, rock fall and complex landslide
in flysch; seismic index = 3
Medium aquifer vulnerability; erosional and/or solid transport events, high volcanic hazard; seismic
index = 2
Medium aquifer vulnerability; debris flow in the pyroclastic deposits and tuff fall; medium-high
volcanic hazard in the Campi Flegrei area; seismic index = 2; presence of cavities.
Medium aquifer vulnerability; debris flow in the pyroclastic deposits and flysch, rock fall; seismic
index = 3
24
Tuff landslide and lava fall; seismic index = 2; presence of cavities
25
erosional and/or solid transport events; seismic index = 2
26
debris flow in the pyroclastic deposits and tuff fall; seismic index = 2; presence of cavities
Tab.3 Vulnerability classes description
Fourth, data in the Physiographic Units map and in the Integrated vulnerability map have been used to
generate the Geological Zones map where the Naples Province area has been subdivide in 22
Geological Zones (FIG. 4).
7
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
Fig. 4: Geological Zones map
The adopted model used to define Geological Zones has had the main aim to avoid the excessive
territorial subdivision. This result has been obtained using two different principles: a) Physiographic
Units as geographic element which allowed us to subdivide the landscape and b) the attribute data
associated to the integrated vulnerability and in the Geomorphological maps to characterise the study
area.
The information associated to each Geological Zone is the sum of total data available, for example the
“GZ15” Geological Zone has been described as follow: the GZ15 correspond to the main part of the
southern sector of the Somma-Vesuvio volcano and it is constituted by lava and pyroclastic deposits
covering an elevation range of 100-600 m. This zone is characterized by a good permeability, in areas
where the lava deposits are well exposed, and by a variable permeability in areas where are exposed
the pyroclastic deposits.
This zone is characterized by solid transport events, medium-high aquifer vulnerability, high volcanic
vulnerability and the presence of cavities.
SETTLEMENT AND LANDSCAPE
The transformation of the Naples province area, in second half of last century, with the urban and
building increase lumped to the bad quality of the urbanized areas and to alteration and erosion of
environment resources caused a critical condition in relation between installing system and landscape,
or rather the crisis of relations system among different territorial and landscape components
(geomorphological, vegetational and settling).
In last ten-year period of last century built areas in different province zones caused suburban settlement
saturation and a building increase in an agricultural context.
The Naples province territory is formed by extended built areas and by an intense settling diffusion in
extra urban territory; for this reason it is important an analysis of built areas to estimate elements that
determine the landscape quality and to built cognitive schemes for landscape planning.
This analysis helps to recognize territorial qualities (integrity, compromission, degradation) and to gain
elements for next location of critical and vulnerable conditions.
8
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
So the studies are based on two main topics: the built areas peculiarities and the landscape
components articulation.
Morphology, density and settlement analysis of built areas produced a cartographic interpretation of
different typologies.
Morphology and density analysis (FIG. 5a, 5b) – as areas coverage percentage – of today built areas,
and consequent interpretative elaborations, form a propedeutic study to location and valuation of the
landscape nature. The aim of this study aim is to distinguish territorial limits in relation to main built
areas settling characters by forming data levels for next studies to integrate the PTCP with landscape
quality subjects and to determine the Landscape Units and pertinent tutelage and requalification
doctrine.
LEGENDA
Confini provinciali
Articolazione del territorio in rapporto alle tipologie insediative:
AU - Aree urbane e insediamenti minori con tessuto prevalentemente continuo
AU 1 - Area urbana centrale e aree urbane periferiche di Napoli anche comprensive di zone
periferiche dei centri limitrofi a cui sono connesse.
AU 2 - Aree urbane e insediamenti prevalentemente densi e compatti del Giuglianese, dell’area
a nord di Napoli, dell’area Acerra-Pomigliano-Scisciano, del Nolano, del Vesuviano interno e
costiero, dell’area stabiese
AU3 - Insediamenti urbani dell’area flegrea.
AU4 - Insediamenti urbani della penisola Sorrentina
AE R- Aree di recente edificazione in espansione agli insediamenti urbani cui sono generalmente
almeno parzialmente relazionate
AER 1 - Aree in prevalenza di recente espansione residenziale con edificato/impianto
parzialmente connesso all’area urbana principale
AER 2 – Aree edificate non sempre fisicamente connesse in espansione ai centri urbani in ambiti
fortemente caratterizzati sotto il profilo morfologico
AEC - Aree interessate da recente edificazione e di rilevante estensione che si estendono in
modo continuo tra più insediamenti, comprensive di spazi agricoli anche estesi
AEC1 - Aree dell’area flegrea sud-occidentale in prevalenza di recente edificazione in
espansione agli insediamenti urbani, caratterizzate in generale dalla continuità dell’edificato e
da spazi agricoli interclusi
AEC 2 - Aree di recente edificazione in espansione agli insediamenti urbani, prevalentemente di
significativa estensione, che si estendono in modo continuo tra più insediamenti
AEC 3 – Fasce edificate lungo la viabilità principale di collegamento tra i centri, in contesto non
urbanizzato
AGG – Aggregati edilizi di recente formazione, in prevalenza di edilizia residenziale, presenti in
contesto agricolo
AGG1 - Aggregati edilizi di recente formazione presenti in contesto agricolo con un’estensione
anche consistente e/o un elevato grado di copertura edilizia
AGG2 - Aree edificate adiacenti al Lago Patria e del litorale giuglianese, con caratterizzazione
anche turistica
AGG3 - Fasce edificate lungo la viabilità territoriale e locale in contesto agricolo
AGG4 – Aggregati edilizi presenti in ambiti fortemente caratterizzati sotto il profilo morfologico
ADI- ED- Aree agricole caratterizzate da dispersione edilizia in prevalenza con elevata densità
ADI-ED 1- Aree agricole in prevalenza caratterizzate
significativa estensione e di edilizia sparsa.
dalla presenza di aggregati anche di
ADI-ED 2 - Aree agricole con diffusa presenza di aggregati edilizi e di edilizia sparsa distribuiti
prevalentemente lungo la viabilità principale e secondaria.
ADI-ED 3 - Aree agricole con accentuata presenza di aggregati edilizi, in generale di contenuta
estensione e prevalentemente con morfologia lineare, e di edilizia sparsa.
ADI-ED 4 - Zone agricole terrazzate dell’ambito collinare nord-orientale della penisola sorrentina
con presenza significativa di edilizia sparsa o piccoli aggregati.
ADI - BD - Aree agricole caratterizzate da dispersione insediativa in
densità
prevalenza con bassa
ADI-BD 1 - Aree agricole caratterizzate dalla presenza diffusa di aggregati, in prevalenza di
contenuta estensione
ADI-BD 2– Aree agricole dei rilievi dell’area flegrea con presenza di aggregati e edilizia sparsa.
ADI-BD 3- Aree agricole con edilizia sparsa e piccoli aggregati nell’area a nord di Napoli,
nell’area Acerra-Pomigliano-Scisciano, nell’area nolana, nell’ area vesuviana interna e nell’area
boschese.
AD-BD 4 - Aree agricole collinari della penisola sorrentina con presenza di contentuti aggregati
edilizi e di edilizia diffusa
AA- Aree agricole caratterizzate dall’assenza o dalla scarsa presenza di edilizia residenziale e di
manufatti con altra destinazione.
AA1 - Aree agricole in prevalenza del territorio aperto o ad esso connesse caratterizzate
dall’assenza o da una scarsa presenza di aggregati e di edilizia.
AA2 - Aree agricole caratterizzate dall’assenza o dalla scarsa presenza di piccoli aggregati e di
edilizia sparsa.
AA3 – Aree agricole caratterizzate dall’assenza o da una contenuta presenza edilizia in contesto
fortemente caratterizzato sotto il profilo morfologico.
AA4 - Aree agricole, anche di significativa estensione, intercluse negli insediamenti urbani e
nelle aree di recente espansione urbana.
SPIN - Spazi di prevalente interesse naturalistico
SPIN 1 - Aree prevalentemente montuose o collinari di elevato interesse naturalistico
caratterizzati dall’assenza o dalla scarsa presenza di episodi edilizi; spiagge e coste rocciose.
SPIN 2 – Aree di interesse naturalistico con contenuta presenza edilizia
SPIN 3 - Fasce perilacuali caratterizzate da rada presenza di manufatti, con destinazione
mista, e spazi agricoli.
SPIN 4 - Fasce dei corsi d’acqua e dei valloni ed aree agricole adiacenti, a volte intercluse in
aree edificate.
SPIN 5– Ambiti costieri con specifica caratterizzazione.
AS - Aree specialistiche
IND-1: Insediamenti industriali
IND-2 - Area industriale dismessa di cui è programmata la riconversione
AP - Aree portuali
AEROP – Aeroporto
SP – Aree, edificate o meno, di rilevante e estensione e/o in territorio extraurbano, con
destinazione specialistica
M - Aree militari
ARCH- aree archeologiche
CAVE
´
N.B. Per quanto riguarda i caratteri distintivi si veda la Relazione allegata
Fig. 5a: Morphology and density analysis: interpretation of the different territorial typologies
Naples continental territory (extract)
9
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
A preliminary study on landscape components to identify its structural elements has been done by
considering both installation system analysis results and environment peculiarity (Fig. 6).
The research, based on European Convention landscape definition, lays stress on territorial physics
structure, forms peculiarities and nature, recognizes relations between different territorial components
and reads how these elements are used and received.
The research is result of combination between main territorial and landscape elements and
interpretation of formal aspects and perceptive characters.
Interaction between the two methods of research allow us to recognize landscape components and
relations among them.
LEGENDA
ELEMENTI DELLA STRUTTURA GEOMORFOLOGICA
#
h6
8
h
h
vette principali
.
!
7
linee di cresta
#
/
"
4
9
!!
conoide alluvionale
h
"
/
!
!
KK
K
K
KK
!
!!
spiaggia
!
!
K
KKKKK
KKK
KKK
falesie
5
h
! !
KK
KKKK
KKK
!
K
KK
K
KK K
KK
KK
5"
/
4
KKKKKKK
! !
!
vegetazione rada
aree prevalentemente agricole
ELEMENTI DEL SISTEMA INSEDIATIVO
KKKKKK
K
KK
KK
KK
KK
!
!
!
!
!
KKKK
K
KKK
KKK
K
KKKKKKKK
KKK
KK
KK
KKK
KKK
KK
K
!
KKKKK
KKK KKKK
KK
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
aree di recente edificazione
VALORI PERCETTIVI
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKKK
!
!
!
!
tessuti storici
!
h2
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
/
"
! !!
!!
KKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKKK
KK
viabilità principale
1!
!
KKKKK
KKKKK
KKKKK
KK
!
KKKKKK
KKKKKKKK
KKKK
KKKK
!
K
KKKKKKKK
KK
KK
versanti collinari e montuosi prevalentemente boscati
1
KKKKKKKKK
!
!
!
ELEMENTI DELLA VEGETAZIONE E DEL PAESAGGIO AGRARIO
KK
KK
KK
KK
KKKKK
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
KK
KK
KK
KK
K
K
KKK
KKKKKKKKK
KKK
KK KKKKKK
K
h 14
h
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
KKKKKK
!
KKK
K
!
!!
KKKK
KK K
K
KKKKKKKKKKK KK KKKKKKK
KKK
K
KKKKKK
KK
KKKKK
KK
K
KK
KK
K
KKK
KKK
KKK
KKK
KK KKKKK
K
KK
KKKKK K
KK
#
KKKKKKKKKKKK
KK
#
5
KKKK
K
KKK
KK K
K
K K
KK
KKKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KK
KK
KK
KK
KK
K
!
.
KKK
KKKKKK
KKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KK
KKKKKK
KK
KKKKKKKKK
KKK
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KKK
KK
KK
.
!
1
#
KKKK
KKKK
3
KKK
KK
KKKK
KKKKKKKKK
#
KKKKKKKK
KKKK
KKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KKK
KKK
K
KK
KK
KK
/
h "
KK
!
10
KKKKK
KKKK
KKKKK
KKKKK
KKKK
KKK
KKKK
KKKKKK KKKKKK
KK
KKK
K KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KKK
KK
KK
KKK
#
KKK
KKK
KK
KK
K
KKKKKKK
!
!
!
KK
KKK K
KKK
!
!
!
!
6
rilievi vulcanici/cupole laviche
rete idrografica
/
"
!
KKKKKKKKKKKK
KKKKK
KKK
KKK
KKKK
#
KKKK
KKKKKKK KKKKKKKKKK
orlo di cratere
duomo di lava
2
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKKKKK
KKK
KK
KK
KKKKKKKKKK
#
#
KKK
KK
!
!
KK
KK
KKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KKK
KKK
KK
KKK
KK
KK
KK
KKK
K
K
KK
KKK
KKK
KKK
K
KKK
KKK
KKK
KKK KKKKKKKK KKKK
KKK
K K
KK
KKKKKKKK
KKKKKK
KK
KK
KK
KK
KK
1h
!
KKKKKKKK
KKKK
KKKKK#
KKKK
KKKKKKK K
KK
KKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKKKK
KKKK
KKK
K
KKKK
KK
! !
!
#
2
KKK
KKKKK KKKK
KKK
KKKKKKKKK
KKK
KK
!
3
!
K
KKK KKKKKKKKKKK
K
!
KKK
K
!
h
KKKKKKKKK
KK
!
"
/ 10
!
.6
!
KKKKK
K
KK
KK
K
/
h"
K
KKKK
KKKK
!
KKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KK
!
KKK
KK
!
2
2
!
!
9 7
!
!
/
"
KKKKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KK
KK
KKK
KKKKKKKKKKK
KKKK KK
KK
KKKKKK K K
KKK
KK
KKKKK
KKKKKKKK
KKKKKKKKKKKK
KKK
KKK
! K
!
!
KKKK
3
KK
K
"
/
ELEMENTI EMERGENTI ECCEZIONALI DELL'AMBITO NATURALE
1- Monte Rotaro / Bosco di Castiglione e Bosco della Maddalena / emergenza visiva / centro di
attenzione
2- Isolotto del Castello / emergenza visiva / centro di attenzione
3- Punta S. Pietro / rocce / elevata pendenza
4- Punta della Scrofa / fondale lontano / sequenza
5- Lacco Ameno / Il Fungo / scoglio / emergenza visiva
6- Punta di Monte Vico / fondale lontano / sequenza
7- Baia di San Montaro / versante ad elevata pendenza / rocce
8- Punta Caruso / promontorio / fondale
9- Punta del Soccorso
10- Punta Imperatore / rocce / elevata pendenza
11- Punta Chiarito
12- Isolotto di Sant'Angelo
13- Spiaggia dei Maronti e Cava Scura
14- Scogli di S. Anna e spiaggia Cartaromana / rocce / elevata pendenza
15- Isolotto di Vivara
16- Punta di Socciaro
17- Punta di Pizzico
18- Promontorio di S. Margherita
19- Altura di Terra Murata
ELEMENTI EMERGENTI ECCEZIONALI DELL'AMBITO COSTRUITO
1- Castello e ponte aragonese
2- Chiesa di S. Pietro
3- Faro
4- Chiesa di S. Restituta
5- Chiesa di Maria SS. di Montevergine
6- Torrione
7- S. Maria del Soccorso
8- Faro
9- Masseria dell'Arbusto / museo
10- Chiesa di S. Maria del Monte
11- Faro di Punta Pioppeto
12- Acropoli di Terra Murata
.
!
h
4
#
torri e mura di fortificazione
ELEMENTI LINEARI DI EMERGENZA PERCETTIVA / MARGINI
1- fasce boscate di margine all'edificato
2- margine / versante boscato - insediamenti (Monte Epomeo - Monte Rotaro - Lacco Ameno Casamicciola)
3- incisioni idrografiche (Barano - Serrara Fontana)
4- versante ad elevata pendenza / rocce - mare (scarrupata di Barano)
5- Punta Imperatore - Spiaggia di Citara
13
h 11
elementi emergenti caratterizzanti l'insieme / centri di attenzione
13
h
fondali
Fig. 5b: Morphology and density analysis: interpretation of the different territorial typologies
Ischia
LEGENDA
IS/SPIN – SPAZI DI PREVALENTE INTERESSE NATURALISTICO
IS/SPIN1
monte Solaro - area ad alta naturalità con vegetazione rada e morfologia complessa con vette isolate
(Monte Solaro, Monte Cappello, Monte S.Maria), conche di dimensione ridotte (conca dell'Alginola),
ripidi versanti che individuano forti margini caratterizzati dall'alternarsi di rocce e cespugliato, aree
boscate circoscritte verso le parti terminali a margine delle aree agricole e degli insediamenti
IS/SPIN2
costa occidentale (Sentiero dei Fortini); costa caratterizzata dall'alternarsi di stretti promontori e baie
profonde; carattere prevalentemente naturale con aree cespugliate e boscate nelle zone più vicine alla
costa; prevalenza del paesaggio agrario nelle zone più interne con limitate zone boscate; bassa
presenza antropica: si individuano case isolate, prevalentemente ville in prossimità della costa, e
piccoli aggregati insediativi nelle aree agricole e lungo la viabilità secondaria perpendicolare alla
costa.
IS/SPIN3
costa sud (punta Marmolata, punta Ventroso, scoglio delle Sirene); costa alta e frastagliata
caratterizzata da ripide pareti rocciose. Totale assenza antropica
IS/SPIN4
costa orientale (Monte S.Michele, Salto di Tiberio, Punta Massullo, Faraglioni); costa alta e articolata
caratterizzata da baie profonde, dalla presenza di aree cespugliate e boscate. Si caratterizza per la
scarsa presenza antropica: sono presenti ville isolate nell'area compresa tra punta Tragara e punta
Massullo
IS/SPIN5
costa nord-ovest (grotta Azzurra, Bagni di Tiberio); area di costa poco articolata caratterizzata da
ripide pareti rocciose e, nelle aree più interne, dalla presenza di aree boscate; bassa presenza antropica
con ville isolate e un piccolo aggregato in prossimità della grotta Azzurra
IS/ADI – AREE AGRICOLE CON PRESENZA DIFFUSA DI EDIFICATO
CARATTERIZZATO DA BASSA DENSITA’
IS/ADI1
Anacapri-Damecuta - aree di edificazione recente in un contesto prevalentemente agricolo; l'edificato
caratterizzato in prevalenza da tipologie di case isolate su lotto segue l'andamento dei rilievi e si
relaziona solo a tratti ai tracciati viari di tipo locale. Presenza di aggregati edilizi recenti poco coerenti
con il contesto ambientale
IS/ADI2
Anacapri-Migliara/Pino - aree di edificazione recente in un contesto prevalentemente agricolo e
fortemente caratterizzato dal punto di vista paesaggistico-ambientale; gli insediamenti, legati solo in
parte alla coltura agricola e caratterizzati da tipologie di case isolate su lotto, sono articolati su
terrazzamenti lungo la viabilità principale
IS/AU – AREE URBANE E INSEDIAMENTI MINORI
IS/AU1
Anacapri - tessuti storici strutturati per aggregati di piccole dimensioni con caratteri tipo-morfologici
complessi e impianto viario estremamente articolato; elevati valori storico-architettonici (nuclei di Le
Boffe e di Pastena); presenza significativa e caratterizzante di aree agricole intercluse
IS/AU2
Capri - tessuti storici caratterizzati da un'area centrale compatta e da connessioni diffuse lungo la
viabilità principale; dominanza di alcune emergenze storiche e monumentali; presenza significativa di
aree boscate e agricole intercluse nell'edificato
IS/AU3
Marina Grande - area caratterizzata da un nucleo di aggregazione compatta lungo la costa (tessuti
storici stratificati di Marina Grande) e da addensamenti dell'edificato, prevalentemente di recente
costruzione, lungo la viabilità di collegamento tra i centri; presenza diffusa di aree coltivate e boscate
intercluse nell'edificato
IS/AU4
Marina Piccola - area caratterizzata da un piccolo nucleo storico lungo la costa e da insediamenti,
prevalentemente di recente edificazione, caratterizzati da tipologie di case isolate su lotto disposti
lungo le curve di livello; presenza significativa di aree boscate
IS/AER – AREE DI EDIFICAZIONE RECENTE
IS/AER
Capri - aree in prevalenza di edificazione recente articolate lungo la viabilità di collegamento al
nucleo centrale e caratterizzata da edificazione residenziale rada (ville) e dalla presenza di attività
ricettive. Presenza significativa di aree boscate e agricole intercluse
IS/AP – AREE PORTUALI
IS/ARCH – AREE ARCHEOLOGICHE
AREE MARINE VINCOLATE
VIABILITA’ PRINCIPALE
Fig. 6: Landscape components articulation
Capri
10
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
LEVEL OF BIODIVERSITY OF RURAL AREAS.
From the land use map edited by the Regione Campania in 2002 [10], in the Naples Province 5 levels of
biodiversity were identified.
Very low level (0) was ascribed to the areas covered by greenhouses which are characterized by the
maximum level of exclusion of species (microbia, flora and fauna) different from that cultivated. The
relationships of these areas with the natural environment (climate, biosphere, energy and water fluxes)
are minimized and the chemical inputs are maximized.
A low level (1) of biodiversity was ascribed to the area used for open field vegetable production, industrial
crops (mainly tobacco) and cereals (mainly corn). In these cropping systems there is a certain level of
presence of extraneous species (i.e. weeds and natural flora, microfauna) also if they are subjected to
chemical and mechanical inputs (soil tillage, mineral fertilizers, pesticides).
A medium level (2) of biodiversity was ascribed to the areas characterized by more high degree of
naturality, mainly represented by land used with orchards (peaches, apricots, peers, apples, hazelnuts).
Also if these cropping systems are intensively managed (i.e. many treatments with pesticides), the
presence of useful insects (i.e. bees), birds and little rodents and cover crops between the rows for
allowing the access to the fields during the rainy periods, are very spread. Besides the cropping period
of these species is sufficiently prolonged for allowing a certain equilibrium between the external inputs
and the developments of natural species (i.e. natural flora and soil microbia) also thanks to a strong
reduction of tillage intensity and frequency. The chemical and energetic inputs are not applied during all
the year, but is limited to the growth periods (usually april-september).
A high level (3) of biodiversity was ascribed to the areas covered by extensive cropping systems which
have a minimum environmental impact: hazelnuts, olive, grape citrus and intercrops and complex
cropping systems. Very important are the soil tillage systems and layouts of these lands which are often
in hilly slopes since they allow to reduce soil degradation and erosion (i.e. terraces of olive and lemons in
Sorrento coast, or of grape in Vesuvius slopes). In the complex cropping systems, often many different
crops (herbaceous and arboreous) are present at the same time and also natural flora is tolerated.
Chemical and mechanical inputs are often limited by the geomorphological conditions. In this category
also natural areas with recent reforestation or degradated for different reasons (i.e. forest fires, mines,…)
were included.
The maximum level (4) of biodiversity was attributed to all the natural areas (woods, shrubs,…) and to the
cropping systems in which the farmers are almost exclusively harvesters, since the chemical and
mechanical inputs are very exceptional (i.e. permanent meadows, pastures, chestnut woods).
From the analysis of the cropping systems in the Naples province (Fig. 7), it rises the areas with a level 0
of biodiversity are not widespread in the Naples Province, but are concentrated in the Northern Part
(Acerra, Caivano and Afragola), in the sea side of Vesuvian coast (Ercolano, Torre del Greco), in the
coastal area of the Sarno river plain (Poggiomarino, Boscoreale, Sant’Antonio Abate, Santa Maria la
Carità and Pompei).
Cropping systems with a low level (1) of biodiversity, mainly represented by horticultural crops, are
concentrated in 2 areas of the Province: the northern part (Acerra, Marigliano, Nola, San Vitaliano e
Pomigliano) and the coastal area of the Sarno river plain. There two areas are also characterized by a
wide presence of the aforesaid greenhouses, since they suffer a very strong anthropic impact.
The areas with a medium level (2) of biodiversity, mainly covered by orchards, are concentrated in the
North-West part (Giugliano in Campania, Qualiano, Villaricca, Quarto, Marano e Sant’Antimo) where
mainly peaches are cultivated, and in the plain at East of the Vesuvius, where apricots predominated
(Sant’Anastasia, Poggiomarino and Casamarciano). These last areas link other areas very important
from a naturalistic point of view (Campi Flegrei, Vesuvius and the woods of Appennino).
The areas with a high level (3) of biodiversity, mainly covered by olive, grape and citrus orchards are
spread along the Sorrento Coast, around the Vesuvius (Trecase e Boscotrecase) where apricots and
hazelnuts predominate, and spread also if not continuous in the North-East (Nola), in Campi Flegrei and
in the Isles.
The areas with a very high level (4) of biodiversity are concentrated in three large areas: the first link the
Isle of Ischia to the Appennino woods (from South-West to North East), passing trough the coastal dunes,
the parks and protected areas of Campi Flegrei and of the Naples City Hills; the second around the
Vesuvius Vulcano in the central part of the Province; the third along the Sorrento Coast, from Capri Isle to
the Appennino woods. It is important to notice that in these three areas are concentrated the highest
number of protected areas of the Naples Province.
11
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
4. very high
3. high
2. medium
1. low
0. very low
Fig. 7: Levels of Biodiversity of natural and cropping systems in the Province of Naples.
CONCLUSIVE REMARKS
The study for location of Landscape Units on provincial scale, is based on an integrated territorial
reading with consideration of specific territorial characters and relations between anthropical and natural
components, that have been analyzed in previous step.
In order to determine Landscape Units, in accordance with regional and national criteria, a first
hypothesis has been done to divide provincial territory in areas recognizable for different characteristics –
hydrogeomorphological, vegetational and agrarian, historical-cultural and settling, perceptive – which
produce territorial and landscape schemes as a synthesis of relations between them.
Studies and researches of this step produced this territorial articulation with reference to an interpretation
of Landscape Units defined as “Ambito caratterizzato da specifici sistemi di relazioni ecologiche,
percettive, storiche, culturali e funzionali tra componenti eterogenee, che gli conferiscono un’immagine
ed un’identità distinte e riconoscibili” [7], [“Sphere characterized by specific systems of ecological,
perceptive, historical, cultural, functional relations between heterogeneous components, which give it
distinct and recognizable imagine and identity”].
A first interpretative synthesis of environmental and landscape characters has produced provincial
territory articulation in 20 areas (17 areas in the continental territory and 3 areas in the islands). This
synthesis will be examined closely to integrate some cognitive aspects and to value single components
roles and their incidence level in landscape configurations production.
The procedure, based on developed analysis, to individuate areas concerns:
consideration of physiographical models as a standard reference;
location of macro-areas recognizable for specific characters and relation systems concerning every
single reading section;
comparison of territorial articulations fixed for each field that, on ground of most significant
components and relations to confer recognizable identificational characters, consents areas
locations.
Reassembling different information and considerations (geological, agronomical, pedological, settling
analysis) has produced initial synthetic valuations and a first provincial territory articulation based on
territorial peculiarities deriving from different ecological, historical, settling, perceptive relation systems.
12
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
4
10
9
17
8
14
11
5
7
16
3
6
1
12
15
20
13
20
19
2
landscape units limits
18
1
2
3
4.5.6
7
8
9
10
VESUVIO
PENISOLA SORRENTINA
CAMPI FLEGREI
AREE PEDEMONTANE DELL’APPENINO CAMPANO
(ROCCARAINOLA, VISCIANO, CARBONARA DI NOLA,
PALMA CAMPANIA)
CAPODIMONTE
LITORALE DOMIZIO
AREA GIUGLIANESE
PIANA ACERRANA
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PIANA VESUVIANA
ESI VESUVIO
AREA STABIESE
NORD-VESUVIO
FASCIA VESUVIANA COSTIERA
AREA NAPOLETANA
COMUNI A NORD DI NAPOLI
CAPRI
ISCHIA
PROCIDA E VIVARA
Fig. 8a: Territorial articulation to locate the landscape units
The map “Articolazione del territorio per la individuazione delle unità di paesaggio“ [“Territorial articulation
to locate the landscape unities“] (FIG.8a) is a starting point to locate Landscape Unit; it consists of
graphic map (1:75000 scale), in which provincial territory is subdivided in twenty areas and of an
enclosure with cards that reports: general area characters; landscape characters pertinent to
geomorphology, hydrographical net, vegetation, agrarian territory; settling and historical resources
system; landscape main characters; location areas hypothesis for landscape models.
13
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
About the islands, a further landscape division in different areas has presented in figure 8b.
8
3a
1b
4
4a
6
3
1a
9b
9
7
6a
8a
9a
1b
1
5
6b
6a 6b
1a
2
3b
Fig. 8b: Territorial articulation to locate the landscape units: Capri Island
An integrated reading with researches in different fields is done for each area, with description of
recurrent environment conditions, of different islands landscape kinds and identification of structural and
characteristic elements which define its specific identity. The main landscape kinds are: large naturalistic
areas, coast landscapes, urban landscapes, agricultural landscapes; landscape models are defined
relating to prevailing of a specific element (natural, geological, settling, agricultural). For example: coast
landscape/highly
characterized
by
geomorphological
and
settling
elements;
coast
landscape/characterized by geomorphological, vegetational and agrarian elements; agricultural
landscape/characterized by diffused settlements.
REFERENCES
[1]
Alberico I., Guerra V. & Lirer L. Il rischio sottosuolo nella Provincia di Napoli. IV Conferenza
Nazionale ASITA - Informazione Geografica: innovazione e formazione, pp. 1411-1416 (2000).
[2]
Alterbitini V.,Baldi A., Collini L., Esposito C., Guerra V., Miraglino P., Schiattarella F. &
Vallario A. Le cavità sotterranee del napoletano: pericolosità e possibili utilizzi, Geologia
Tecnica N.3 (1998)
[3]
Corniello A. & de Riso R. Caratterizzazione della circolazione e qualità delle acque
sotterranee. In Analisi dell’ambiente fisico ed antropizzato, individuazione e definizione dei
rischi naturali, pp. 59-80, (1998).
[4]
de Riso R. & Lirer L., I Caratteri Fisico-Ambientali del Territorio - La carta Geolitologica, della
Provincia di Napoli - In Analisi dell’ambiente fisico ed antropizzato, individuazione e definizione
dei rischi naturali, pp. 1-14, (1998).
[5]
de Riso R., Iaccarino G. & Pellegrino A. Caratterizzazione geomorfologica e
fenomeni franosi. In analisi dell’ambiente fisico ed antropizzato, individuazione e
definizione dei rischi naturali, 15-24(1998).
[6]
Evangelista A. Cavità e dissesti nel sottosuolo dell’area napoletana, Atti del Convegno “Rischi
naturali ed impatto antropico nell’area metropolitana napoletana” (1991)
14
14TH European Colloquium on Theoretical and Quantitative Geography | September 9-13, 2005
| Tomar, Portugal
[7]
Gambino, Roberto et al, Regione autonoma Valle d’Aosta, Piano territoriale
paesistico. Urbanistica Quaderni 14, 1997
[8]
Lirer L. La pericolosità vulcanica nella Provincia di Napoli. In analisi dell’ambiente fisico ed
antropizzato, individuazione e definizione dei rischi naturali, pp. 146-157 (1998)
[9]
Lirer L, Petrosino P, Alberico I & Postiglione I. Long-term volcanic hazard forecasts based
on Somma-Vesuvio past eruptive activity. (2001) Bull Volcanol 63:45–60
[10]
Regione Campania, 2002. Carta di uso del suolo. Settore difesa del suolo, progetto It
2000, 1998.
AUTHORS INFORMATION
CAIAZZO STEFANIA
[email protected],
Dipartimento di Urbanistica
University of Napoli Federico II
ALBERICO INES
[email protected]
C.I.R.AM (Centro Interdipartimentale di Ricerca Ambiente)
University of Napoli Federico II
APREDA IMMA
[email protected]
Dipartimento di Urbanistica
University of Napoli Federico II
DAL PIAZ ALESSANDRO
[email protected]
Dipartimento di Urbanistica
University of Napoli Federico II
FAGNANO MASSIMO
[email protected]
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Agraria e Agronomia
University of Napoli Federico II
University of Napoli Federico II
15