Decision Making


Decision Making


Large  transport infrastructure works, necessary for the country's development and a tangible tool for unifying the EU, have sometimes triggered social and interinstitutional conflicts in the area such as to cause serious delays to the project or cessation of the project itself. Opposition is manifested in varying forms: on the protest front we often find citizens' committees, but also local political figures and the Councils. This type of "tete-a-tete" between associationism and politics highlights an instrumental and insufficiently responsible approach. Politics based on traditional tools comes into difficulty when it needs to build consensus around difficult decisions; involvement of the area from the first decision-making phases of the work is often interpreted by the decision-makers as a limit to the action of the territory's governing body, rather than an opportunity. At the same time, even the participative models are destined to fail if it is unclear who is responsible for what. In some cases, this mechanism causes and encourages dispute, which is sometimes manifested with violence.


However, it is not the conflict per se, as long as it isn't destructive, that represents a pathology. If managed well, (ability to evaluate its causes, to answer the questions set, to govern it), it can draw out knowledge and elements from the territory that may prove useful for the project. Considering the social sustainability of the project as an integral part of the decision-making process is therefore a pre-requisite to constructing shared decisions and re-composing the conflicts.


The goal of the Province of Turin and the Region of Veneto is to propose tools that can develop decision-makers' abilities in approaching new infrastructural projects with more awareness and transparency, declining the concept of social sustainability in the various phases of realisation of the infrastructure, equal to the economic and environmental sustainability.