Considering the quality of projects in relation to the city as a common good

When architects speak of the quality of projects they do so from the point of view of production, or in other words they ask “how to create quality”. In this viewpoint, economic viability, structural solidity, functionality and beauty are regarded as the fundamental dimensions. Adopting a different perspective, the present article tackles the problem of quality in the city by concentrating on the effects of projects that, by modifying the use of urban spaces in their entirety, transform the environment of life for citizens. In the second and third sections, this article considers the city as a complex whole, a system of relationships between the physical, built and socio-economic environments. It examines the functions and relationships in the system in terms of the sensory perception of its users. We argue that the city should be interpreted as a common good, the home of the community, which provides for those needs that cannot be satisfied by individuals alone but require there to be a union between people. In the fifth section we outline the concept of common good and in the sixth we indicate how it can be applied to the city and its public urban spaces. After this, we bring to light the concept of the ‘tragedy of the commons’, which in the urban context involves the dispossession and private appropriation of public spaces. Subtracting from the common good leads to the loss of urban value and contributes to a sense of crisis in the city. In Section 7 we advocate the abandonment of the individualistic view and adoption of an approach that is rooted in the community and based on principles of care, responsibility and reciprocity. The final section describes the effects that this alternative perspective would have on the level of evaluation, underlining the need to complement traditional forms of individual evaluation (techni-cal-managerial and for economic efficiency) with partic-ipative forms, which are open to all members of civil society and are thus more able to express the relational nature of the urban common good. In this case, evaluating the quality of a project means verifying changes in the way that urban spaces are used and determining their effects upon the city with regard to the common good. The transition from theoretical reflection to practical action remains an unresolved problem, which, however, is outside the scope of this article.