Using Heritage to Develop Sustainable Port–City Relationships: Lisbon’s Shift from Object-Based to Landscape Approaches

Abstract

Port cities face enormous sustainability challenges. In this chapter, we propose a relational view of these challenges and explore how different models of governance connect the three pillars of sustainable development: economy, environment, and society. We also address the contradictions inherent to new port plans or waterfront projects, zooming in on the case of Lisbon, Portugal to evaluate the role of heritage in the sustainable development of its historic maritime waterfront. We assess the extent to which reusing heritage structures strengthens the Lisbon port-to-city relationship with regard to governance and outcome. Our account shows that the city departed from its earlier object-based approach to adopt UNESCO's approach of Historic Urban Landscapes (HUL). This shift has triggered deeper reflection among key city actors on the connections between city and port in Lisbon, as well as on the role of the waterfront landscape. We argue that its new approach to heritage potentially produces new governance arenas where new port-city coalitions can emerge-coalitions that have the potential to align economic and environmental objectives with the sociocultural motives that underpin the goals of heritage preservation. We conclude by emphasizing both the challenges of public participation and the critical importance of engagement of port authorities. Each is necessary if European port cities are to effectively pursue sustainable relationships.

Constructing a Theoretical Framework of the Urban Transformation Processes of the Port City Interface towards Resilient Egyptian Port Cities

“…The CRF can be classified among four categories: the health and security of residents (people); infrastructure and environment (place); economy and society (organization); and, finally, leadership and strategy (institution). It consists of 12 key goals that define the actual outcomes of a resilient PC, which are directly related to the physical, governance and social integration factors of the PCI [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]. Therefore, the research argues that following the previously mentioned factors of GI and SI in planning/governing the port with the city will enhance the resilience of the PCI.…”

Challenges for European Tourist-City-Ports: Strategies for a Sustainable Coexistence in the Cruise Post-COVID Context

“…Barcelona [73,89], Venice [96], Amsterdam [90], Dubrovnik [91], Lisbon [100] 3. Regionalizing Cruise Business…”

“…Barcelona [102], Amsterdam [90], Copenhagen and Bilbao [94], Lisbon [100] 5. Re-use Port's Industrial Heritage Ports' industrial buildings are being taken over for local activities that adapt to new ways of living and working, and coexist perfectly with tourist and port activity, keeping alive the memory and identity of the port-city.…”

“…They keep the essence of the city alive through the activities of its inhabitants, with a logic about reusing existing structures, to prevent ports from becoming non-places and their cities from becoming theme parks. Examples of these interventions (see Figure 3) are the LX-Factory, in Lisbon [100,106], the NDSM, in Amsterdam [104,105], and many others where local creative activity has become the focus of tourist attraction or even the Arsenal of Venice that hosts the Biennale [103]. However, if, to these actions the port activity is added, such as old harbor markets, with much of the building in disuse, which can be reactivated with fish markets, restaurants of local fresh products, such as the Sidney Fish Market, or soon, the Barcelona Fish Market, it is the tourism itself that resurrects and encourages traditional local activity [124].…”

Morphological Evolution of the Port‐City Interface of Algiers (16th Century to the Present)

“…Nevertheless, with the rise of containerisation deepening the port-city split in the mid-20th century (Hoyle et al, 1988;Schubert, 2018), the abandonment of port sites most closely located to city centres also resulted in the new urban phenomenon of waterfront revitalisations that profoundly modified the interface areas again (Aouissi, 2016;Porfyriou & Sepe, 2017). Industrial storage terrains, and locations strongly connected to transport infrastructure that fell out of use, became favourable grounds for large urban transformation operations, with cities like Baltimore, Barcelona, or Lisbon offering some of the most illustrative cases in this regard (Aouissi, 2019;Sánchez & Daamen, 2020). Often seen as some sort of panacea for the break-up between cities and ports, the question remains whether waterfront revitalisation plans are also able to overthrow the traditional industrial density of the port-city interface in non-Western maritime hubs, which often drag along a different trajectory of urban evolution.…”