In recent years, the need to orient urban and territorial policies toward models of integrated sustainability and climate resilience has become increasingly urgent. Climate change, socio-economic inequalities, and the new challenges posed by the ecological transition require a profound rethinking of territorial governance processes. This condition, further exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to revive local economies, has led the European Union and its Member States to adopt new instruments and strategies, including the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) and innovative urban regeneration programs. In particular, the progressive consolidation of the “Do No Significant Harm” (DNSH) principle, introduced through the European Taxonomy and the NRRP, highlights the need for streamlined evaluation criteria capable of ensuring that territorial transformations do not cause significant harm to the environment while simultaneously promoting sustainable development practices. However, recent experiences in urban regeneration, together with the emergence of instruments such as DNSH, demonstrate that approaches commonly considered “traditional” — based on technical and sectoral assessments, often limited to procedural aspects alone — are no longer adequate to address the challenges posed by the ecological transition. Urban and territorial policies, having become increasingly complex and integrated, require evaluation methodologies capable of capturing the multidimensionality of contexts, the circularity of resources, social inclusion, and the reduction of environmental impacts. DNSH does not merely operate as a constraint; rather, it emerges as a horizontal criterion capable of guiding regeneration interventions toward innovative solutions attentive to life cycles, equity, and the resilience of the urban system. From this perspective, a greater integration of DNSH within urban policy instruments — with particular attention to urban devices for Housing Quality (PINQuA) and NRRP measures — becomes an opportunity to experiment with multidisciplinary evaluation approaches that consider not only emissions reduction and ecosystem protection, but also resource circularity, climate resilience, social cohesion, and the reduction of local vulnerabilities. The challenge lies in recognizing plans, projects, and interventions not merely as technical objects, but as opportunities to activate processes of institutional learning, community participation, and the co-production of knowledge. Considering these premises, the research aims to analyze how the envisaged evaluation process — understood not only as a control tool, but also as a generator of integrated knowledge — may contribute to improving urban and territorial planning processes in the era of ecological transition. Moving within the Italian context, where DNSH applies across all NRRP policies, this study seeks to examine the methodology applied to a case study through environmental compliance indicators and technical standards, highlighting limitations, opportunities, and future directions for the development of a new evaluative approach functional to programming the ecological transition toward objectives of resilience, inclusiveness, and sustainability.
Negli ultimi anni, l’esigenza di orientare le politiche urbane e territoriali verso modelli di sostenibilità integrata e resilienza climatica è divenuta sempre più pressante. Cambiamenti climatici, disuguaglianze socio-economiche e nuove sfide poste dalla transizione ecologica richiedono un ripensamento profondo dei processi di governo del territorio. Questa condizione, ulteriormente acutizzata dalla pandemia da Covid-19 e dalla necessità di rilanciare le economie locali, ha spinto l’Unione Europea e gli Stati membri ad adottare nuovi strumenti e strategie, tra cui il Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza (PNRR) e programmi innovativi di rigenerazione urbana. In particolare, la progressiva affermazione del principio “Do No Significant Harm” (DNSH), introdotto dalla Tassonomia europea e dal PNRR, mostra la necessità di criteri valutativi snelli in grado di garantire che le trasformazioni territoriali non arrechino danni significativi all’ambiente e, al contempo promuovano pratiche di sviluppo sostenibile. Tuttavia, le recenti esperienze di rigenerazione urbana, nonché l’emergere di strumenti come il DNSH, mostrano che gli approcci considerabili “tradizionali” – basati su valutazioni tecniche e settoriali, spesso limitate ai soli aspetti procedurali – non risultano più adatte ad affrontare le sfide poste dalla transizione ecologica. Le politiche urbane e territoriali, divenute più complesse e integrate, richiedono metodologie valutative capaci di cogliere la multidimensionalità dei contesti, la circolarità delle risorse, l’inclusione sociale e la riduzione degli impatti ambientali. Il DNSH non si limita a operare come vincolo, ma emerge come criterio orizzontale in grado di orientare gli interventi di rigenerazione verso soluzioni innovative, attente ai cicli di vita, all’equità e alla resilienza del sistema urbano. In questa prospettiva, una maggiore integrazione del DNSH nei dispositivi urbani - con particolare attenzione ai dispositivi urbani per la Qualità dell’Abitare (PINQUA) e alle misure del PNRR – diviene occasione per sperimentare approcci valutativi multidisciplinari che considerino non solo la riduzione delle emissioni e la tutela degli ecosistemi, ma anche la circolarità delle risorse, la resilienza climatica, la coesione sociale e la riduzione delle 8 vulnerabilità locali. La sfida è quella di riconoscere piani, progetti e interventi non come meri oggetti tecnici, bensì come opportunità per attivare cicli di apprendimento istituzionale, partecipazione comunitaria e co-produzione di conoscenza. Considerando queste premesse, la ricerca propone di analizzare come la valutazione prevista – intesa non solo come strumento di controllo, ma come generatore di conoscenza integrata – possa contribuire a migliorare i processi della pianificazione urbana e territoriale nell’era della transizione ecologica. Muovendosi nel contesto italiano, dove il DNSH trova applicazione in tutte le politiche PNRR, questo studio mira ad approfondire la metodologia applicata ad un caso, attraverso gli indicatori e standards tecnici di conformità ambientale, evidenziando limiti, opportunità e direzioni di sviluppo per un nuovo approccio valutativo, funzionale alla programmazione della transizione ecologica con obiettivi di resilienza, inclusività e sostenibilità.
Valutare i dispositivi urbani per la Transizione Ecologica: Il DNSH nel Programma Innovativo per la Qualità dell’ Abitare / Di Giustino, Gianmarco. - (2026 May 14).
Valutare i dispositivi urbani per la Transizione Ecologica: Il DNSH nel Programma Innovativo per la Qualità dell’ Abitare.
DI GIUSTINO, GIANMARCO
2026-05-14
Abstract
In recent years, the need to orient urban and territorial policies toward models of integrated sustainability and climate resilience has become increasingly urgent. Climate change, socio-economic inequalities, and the new challenges posed by the ecological transition require a profound rethinking of territorial governance processes. This condition, further exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to revive local economies, has led the European Union and its Member States to adopt new instruments and strategies, including the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) and innovative urban regeneration programs. In particular, the progressive consolidation of the “Do No Significant Harm” (DNSH) principle, introduced through the European Taxonomy and the NRRP, highlights the need for streamlined evaluation criteria capable of ensuring that territorial transformations do not cause significant harm to the environment while simultaneously promoting sustainable development practices. However, recent experiences in urban regeneration, together with the emergence of instruments such as DNSH, demonstrate that approaches commonly considered “traditional” — based on technical and sectoral assessments, often limited to procedural aspects alone — are no longer adequate to address the challenges posed by the ecological transition. Urban and territorial policies, having become increasingly complex and integrated, require evaluation methodologies capable of capturing the multidimensionality of contexts, the circularity of resources, social inclusion, and the reduction of environmental impacts. DNSH does not merely operate as a constraint; rather, it emerges as a horizontal criterion capable of guiding regeneration interventions toward innovative solutions attentive to life cycles, equity, and the resilience of the urban system. From this perspective, a greater integration of DNSH within urban policy instruments — with particular attention to urban devices for Housing Quality (PINQuA) and NRRP measures — becomes an opportunity to experiment with multidisciplinary evaluation approaches that consider not only emissions reduction and ecosystem protection, but also resource circularity, climate resilience, social cohesion, and the reduction of local vulnerabilities. The challenge lies in recognizing plans, projects, and interventions not merely as technical objects, but as opportunities to activate processes of institutional learning, community participation, and the co-production of knowledge. Considering these premises, the research aims to analyze how the envisaged evaluation process — understood not only as a control tool, but also as a generator of integrated knowledge — may contribute to improving urban and territorial planning processes in the era of ecological transition. Moving within the Italian context, where DNSH applies across all NRRP policies, this study seeks to examine the methodology applied to a case study through environmental compliance indicators and technical standards, highlighting limitations, opportunities, and future directions for the development of a new evaluative approach functional to programming the ecological transition toward objectives of resilience, inclusiveness, and sustainability.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2026.pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: Tesi
Tipologia:
Tesi di dottorato
Dimensione
835.24 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
835.24 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.



