Next Article in Journal
Grid Mapping for Spatial Pattern Analyses of Recurrent Urban Traffic Congestion Based on Taxi GPS Sensing Data
Next Article in Special Issue
Modeling Knowledge in Environmental Analysis: A New Approach to Soundscape Ecology
Previous Article in Journal
The Development of the Renewable Energy Power Industry under Feed-In Tariff and Renewable Portfolio Standard: A Case Study of China’s Photovoltaic Power Industry
Previous Article in Special Issue
Demographic Changes and Real Estate Values. A Quantitative Model for Analyzing the Urban-Rural Linkages
Article Menu
Issue 4 (April) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability 2017, 9(4), 537;

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

Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, DICAr, University of Pavia, via Ferrata 3, 27100 Pavia, Italy
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 31 December 2016 / Revised: 25 March 2017 / Accepted: 27 March 2017 / Published: 31 March 2017
Full-Text   |   PDF [41488 KB, uploaded 4 April 2017]   |  


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. View Full-Text
Keywords: rural–urban; interdisciplinary approach; evaluation and comparison rural–urban; interdisciplinary approach; evaluation and comparison

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Lotto, R.D.; Cattaneo, T.; Giorgi, E.; Venco, E.M. Coherences and Differences among EU, US and PRC Approaches for Rural Urban Development: Interscalar and Interdisciplinary Analysis. Sustainability 2017, 9, 537.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top