Mega projects and sustainable city image: evidence from Nuevo Norte Project of Madrid

References

• Abril IN (2020). Gender impact assessments, a tool for the implementation of the new urban agenda: the case of madrid Nuevo Norte. In: de Madariaga IS, Neuman M. Engendering cities designing sustainable urban spaces for all. eds. New York: Routledge; p. ch. 15.
   Google Scholar
• Alberti M. 1996. Measuring urban sustainability. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 16(4–6):381–424. doi: 10.1016/S0195-9255(96)00083-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Damkhi A, Abdul-Wahab S, Al-Khalaf B, Sa’ad Al-Nafisi A. 2008. Developing environmental impact statement (EIS) guidelines for the management of environmental quality at Major Projects in Kuwait. Manag Environ Qual Int J. 19(6):670–689. doi: 10.1108/14777830810904902.
   Google Scholar
• Aly H. 2019. Royal dream: city branding and Saudi Arabia’s NEOM“. Middle East - Topics & Arguments. 12(1):99–109.
   Google Scholar
• Anguelovski I, Irazabal-Zurita C, Connolly JJT. 2019. Grabbed urban landscapes: Socio-spatial tensions in green infrastructure planning in Medellín. Int J Urban Regional Res. 43(1):133–156. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anholt S. 2008. Place branding: is it marketing, or isn’t it? Place Brand Public Dipl. 4(1):1–6. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.pb.6000088.
   Google Scholar
• Annan KA. 2002. Toward a sustainable future. Environ: Sci Policy Sustainable Dev. 44(7):10–15. doi: 10.1080/00139150209605802.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansar A, Flyvbjerg B, Budzier A, Lunn D. 2017. Big is fragile: an attempt at theorizing scale. In: Flyvbjerg B, editor The oxford handbook of megaproject management. Oxford: Oxford University Press; pp. 60–95.
   Google Scholar
• Arabindoo P. 2011. ‘City of sand’: stately Re-imagination of Marina Beach in Chennai. Int J Urban Regional. 35(2):379–401. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00943.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arch AF. 2014. Sustainable Urban Renewal: the Tel Aviv Dilemma. Sustainability. 6(5):2527–2537. doi: 10.3390/su6052527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashworth JG, Voogd H. 1990. Selling the city. London, NY: Belhaven Press).
   Google Scholar
• Avraham E. 2004. Media strategies for improving an unfavorable city image. Cities. 21(6):471–479. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2004.08.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer W. 1972. Import substitution and industrialization in Latin America: experiences and interpretations. Lat Am Res Rev. 7(1):95–122. doi: 10.1017/S0023879100041224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagheri A, Hjorth P. 2007. Planning for sustainable development: a paradigm shift towards a process-based approach. Sustainable Dev. 15(2):83–96. doi: 10.1002/sd.310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balfors B, M€ Ortberg U, Gontier M, Brokking P. 2005. Impacts of region-wide urban development on biodiversity in strategic environmental assessment. J Environ Assess Policy Manage. 7(2):229–246. doi: 10.1142/S1464333205002006.
   Google Scholar
• Banihashemi S, Hosseini MR, Golizadeh H, Sankaran S. 2017. Critical success factors (CSFs) for integration of sustainability into construction project management practices in developing countries. Int J Proj Manag. 35(6):1103–1119. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron N, Fernandez AG. 2019. Grand projet et gouvernementalité urbaine à Madrid : fonctions, fictions, frictions. Annales de géographie. 3(727):94–115. doi: 10.3917/ag.727.0094.
   Google Scholar
• Bibri SE, Krogstie J. 2017. Smart sustainable cities of the future: an extensive interdisciplinary literature review. Sustain Cities Soc. 31:183–212. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bramley G, Watkins D. 2016. Housebuilding, demographic change and affordability as outcomes of local planning decisions: exploring interactions using a sub-regional model of housing markets in England. Prog Plann. 104:1–35. doi: 10.1016/j.progress.2014.10.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulkeley H. 2006. Urban sustainability: learning from best practice? Environ Plan A. 38(6):1029–1044. doi: 10.1068/a37300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boateng P, Chen Z, Ogunlana SO. 2015. An analytical network process model for risks prioritisation in megaprojects. Int J Proj Manag. 33(8):1795–1811.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camagni R. 1998. Sustainable urban development: definition and reasons for a research programme. Int J Environ Pollut. 10(1):6–27. doi: 10.1504/IJEP.1998.002228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell S. 1996. Green cities, growing cities, just cities?: urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. J Am Plann Assoc. 62(3):296–312. doi: 10.1080/01944369608975696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capolongo S, Sdino L, Dell’ovo M, Moioli R, Torre SD. 2019. How to assess urban regeneration proposals by considering conflicting values. Sustainability. 11(14):3877. doi: 10.3390/su11143877.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carmona M. 2009. Sustainable urban design: principles to practice. Int J Sustainable Dev. 12(1):48–77. doi: 10.1504/IJSD.2009.027528.
   Google Scholar
• Chan C-S, Marafa LM. 2016. Perceptual content analysis for city image: a case study of Hong Kong. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 21(12):1285–1299. doi: 10.1080/10941665.2016.1141226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clemente M, Slavati L. 2017. ‘Interrupted’ landscapes: post-earthquake reconstruction in between Urban Renewal and social identity of local communities. Sustainability. 9(11):2015. doi: 10.3390/su9112015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conroy MM, Berke PR. 2004. What makes a good sustainable development plan? An analysis of factors that influence principles of sustainable development. Environ Plan A. 36(8):1381–1396. doi: 10.1068/a367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahles H. 1998. Redefining Amsterdam as a tourist destination. Ann Tour Res. 25(1):55–69. doi: 10.1016/S0160-7383(97)00061-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahri S, Omri A. 2018. Entrepreneurship contribution to the three pillars of sustainable development: what does the evidence really say? World Dev. 106:64–77. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.01.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deakin M. 2009. A community-based approach to sustainable urban regeneration. J Urban Technol. 16(1):91–112. doi: 10.1080/10630730903090354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deffner A, Karachalis N, Psatha E, Metaxas T, Sirakoulis K. 2020. City marketing and planning in two Greek cities: plurality or constraints? Eur Plan Stud. 28(7):1333–1354. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1701291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dempsey N, Bramley G, Power S, Brown C. 2011. The social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Dev. 19(5):289–300. doi: 10.1002/sd.417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denicol J, Davies A, Krystallis I. 2020. What are the causes and cures of poor megaproject performance? A systematic literature review and research agenda. Proj Manag J. 51(3). doi: 10.1177/8756972819896113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Del Cerro Santanaria G. 2019. Mega projects, development and competitiveness: building the infrastructure for globalisation and neoliberalism. Athens J Soc Sci. 6(4):263–290.
   Google Scholar
• Diamantini C, Zanon B. 2000. Planning the urban sustainable development: the case of the plan for the province of Trento, Italy. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 20(3):299–310. doi: 10.1016/S0195-9255(00)00042-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitriou HT, Field BG. 2019. Mega infrastructure projects as agents of change: new perspectives on ‘the global infrastructure gap. J Mega Infrastruct Sustainable Dev. 1(2):116–150. doi: 10.1080/24724718.2020.1786877.
   Google Scholar
• Dimitriou J.D., Mourmouris C.J. and Sartzetaki F.M. (2015). Economic impact assessment of mega infrasrtucture pipeline projects, Applied Economics. 47(40):4310–4322
   Google Scholar
• Distrito Castellana Norte. Accesibilidad, Movilidad, Sostenibilidad y Tecnología, Pilares de la Ciudad del siglo XXI. 2018a. Available online: https://distritocastellananorte.com/accesibilidad-movilidad-sostenibilidad-y-tecnologia-pilares-de-la-ciudaddel-siglo-xxi/ (accessed on 24 November 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Distrito Castellana Norte. 2018b. (DNC). Madrid Nuevo Norte, urban planning aligned with the objectives of sustainable development. Available online: https://districtcastellananorte.com/madrid-nuevo-norte-urbanismo-alineado-con-los-objetivos-de-desarrollo-sostenible/#1586184757222-9e6f8731-47d5 (accessed May 23th).
   Google Scholar
• Distrito Castellana Norte. 2018c. (DNC). Accesibility, mobility, sustainability and technology, pillars of the city XXI century. Available on line: https://districtcastellananorte.com/accesibilidad-movilidad-sostenibilidad-y-tecnologia-pilares-de-la-ciudad-21st-century (accessed on June 2023).
   Google Scholar
• Fernández-Güell JM. 2014. Madrid, disP - the planning review. 50(1):6–15. doi: 10.1080/02513625.2014.925715.
   Google Scholar
• Floricel S, Miller R. 2001. Strategizing for anticipated risks and turbulence in large - scale engineering projects. Int J Proj Manag. 19(8):445–455.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg B, Bruzelius N, Rothengatter W. 2003. Megaprojects and risk. An anatomy of ambition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gallardo M, Martínez-Vega J. 2016. Three decades of land-use changes in the region of Madrid and how they relate to territorial planning. Eur Plan Stud. 24(5):1016–1033. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2016.1139059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia BD. 2021. Urban policies and large projects in central city areas: the example of Madrid (Spain). Urban Sci. 5(2):42. doi: 10.3390/urbansci5020042.
   Google Scholar
• Giezen M. 2012. Keeping it simple? A case study into andvanatges and disadvantages of reducing complexity in mega project planning. Int J Proj Manag. 30(7):781–790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gollin D, Jedwab R, Vollrath D. 2016. Urbanization with and without industrialization. J Econ Growth. 21(1):35–70. doi: 10.1007/s10887-015-9121-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall T. 1998. ‘Urban Geography’. N.Y: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hansson AG. 2017. Promoting planning for housing development: what can Sweden learn from Germany? Land Use Policy. 64:470–478. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.03.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hult A. 2013. Swedish production of sustainable urban imaginaries in China. J Urban Technol. 20(1):77–94. doi: 10.1080/10630732.2012.735405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jepson JE, Edwards MM. 2010. How possible is sustainable urban development? An analysis of planners’ perceptions about new urbanism. Smart Growth and the Ecological City, Planning Practice and Research. 25(4):417–437.
   Google Scholar
• Juan Y, Roper KO, Castro‐Lacouture D, Ha Kim J. 2010. Optimal decision making on urban renewal projects. Manage Decis. 48(2):207–224. doi: 10.1108/00251741011022581.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kain J-H, Soderberg H. 2008. Management of complex knowledge in planning for sustainable development: the use of multi-criteria decision aids. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 28(1):7–21. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2007.03.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kardes I, Ozturk A, Cavusgil ST, Cavusgil E. 2013. Managing global megaprojects: complexity and risk management. Int Bus Rev. 22(6):905–917. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.01.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karji A, Woldesenbet A, Khanzadi M, Tafazzoli M. 2019. Assessment of social sustainability indicators in mass housing construction: a case study of mehr housing project. Sustain Cities Soc. 50:101697. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kattel GR, Shang W, Wang Z, Langford J. 2019. China’s south-to-north water diversion project empowers sustainable water resources system in the north. Sustainability. 11(13):3735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavaratzis M. 2004. From city marketing to city branding: towards a theoretical framework for developing city brands. Place Brand Public Dipl. 1(1):58–73. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.pb.5990005.
   Google Scholar
• Kavaratzis M, Ashworth G. 2008. Place marketing: how did we get here and where are we going? J Place Manage Dev. 1(2):150–165. doi: 10.1108/17538330810889989.
   Google Scholar
• Kazepov Y, eds. 2005. Cities of Europe: changing contexts, local arrangements, and the challenge to urban cohesion. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Khalaf RW. 2019. World heritage policy on reconstruction: from exceptional case to conservation treatment. Int J Cult Policy. 25(7):871–885. doi: 10.1080/10286632.2018.1429423.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy L. 2015. The politics and changing paradigm of megaproject development in metropolitan cities. Habitat Int. 45(3):163–168. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.07.001.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy L, Robbins G, Bon B, Takano G, Varrel A, Andrade J (2014). Megaprojects and urban development in cities of the south. Available online: http://chance2sustain.eu/fileadmin/Website/Dokumente/Dokumente/Publications/publications_2014/C2S_TR_No05_WP2_-_Megaprojects_and_Urban_Development_in_Cities_of_the_South_V2-3.pdf (accessed on 12 November 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Kopp JM, Petretta DL. 2017. The urban sustainable development goal: indicators, complexity and the politics of measuring cities. Cities. 63:92–97. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2016.12.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotler P, Rein I, Haider HD. 1993. Marketing places: attracting investment, industry, and tourism to cities, regions and nations. New York: Free Press).
   Google Scholar
• Kotler P, Asplund C, Rein I, Haider HD. 1999. Marketing places Europe: attracting investments, Industries and visitors to European Cities, communities, regions and nations. Harlow: Financial Times/Prentice Hall).
   Google Scholar
• Kwai-Cheong C. 2015. Three gorges projects of China: resettlement prospects and problems. AMBIO. 24(2):98–102.
   Google Scholar
• Larco N. 2016. Sustainable urban design – a (draft) framework. J Urban Des (Abingdon). 21(1):1–29. doi: 10.1080/13574809.2015.1071649.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li H, Zhang X, Ng ST, Skitmore M, Dong YH. 2018. Social sustainability indicators of public construction megaprojects in China. J Urban Plann Dev. 44(4):04018034. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000472.
   Google Scholar
• Loftman P, Nevin B. 1996. Going for growth: prestige projects in three British cities. Urban Stud. 33(6):991–1019. doi: 10.1080/00420989650011708.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludovico DD, D’ Ovidio G, Santilli D. 2020. Post-earthquake reconstruction as an opportunity for a sustainable reorganisation of transport and urban structure. Cities. 96:102447. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lux G. 2015. Minor cities in a metropolitan world: challenges for development and governance in three Hungarian urban agglomerations. Int Plan Stud. 20(1–2):21–38. doi: 10.1080/13563475.2014.942491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKinnon DP. 2008. Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Maclaren VM. 1996. Urban sustainability reporting. J Am Plann Assoc. 62(2):184–202. doi: 10.1080/01944369608975684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malhotra N, Birks D. 2003. Marketing research: an applied approach. 2nd European ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Malhotra N, Birks D. 2006. Marketing research: an applied approach. 3rd European ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Margies N. 2015 August. Restructuring madrid´s riverfront. Mega-projects and the crux of producing just outcome. Paper presented at the RC21 International Conference on “The Ideal City: between myth and reality. Representations, policies, contradictions and challenges for tomorrow’s urban life” Urbino (Italy). 27–29.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald S, Malys M, Maliene V. 2009. Urban regeneration for sustainable communities: a case study. Technol Econ Dev Eco. 15(1):49–59. doi: 10.3846/1392-8619.2009.15.49-59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mega V. 1996. Our city, our future: towards sustainable development in European cities. Environ Urban. 8(1):133–154. doi: 10.1177/095624789600800111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendels FF. 1972. Proto-industrialization: the first phase of the industrialization process. J Econ Hist. 32(1):241–261. doi: 10.1017/S0022050700075495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metaxas T. 2009. Place marketing, strategic planning and competitiveness: the case of Malta. Eur Plan Stud. 17(9):1357–1378. doi: 10.1080/09654310903053539.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metaxas T. 2003. The image of the city as a ‘good’: the creation of a city’s promotional package through a strategic framework analysis of city marketing procedure. In: Beriatos E, editors. ‘Sustainable planning and development. Southampton, UK: Wessex Institute of Technology and Department of Planning and Regional Development, University of Thessaly, WIT Press; pp. 427–438. doi:10.2495/SPD030401.
   Google Scholar
• Metaxas T. 2010. Cities competition, Place Marketing and Economic Development in South Europe: the Barcelona case as FDI destination. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management. 5(14):5–19.
   Google Scholar
• Metaxas T, Juarez L, Gavriilidis G. 2021. Planning and marketing the city for sustainability: the Madrid Nuevo Norte Project. Sustainability. 13(4):2094. doi: 10.3390/su13042094.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metaxas T, Gallego JS, Juarez L. 2023. Sustainable urban development and the role of mega-projects: experts’ view about Madrid Nuevo Norte project. J Infrastruct Policy Dev. 7(2):2161. doi: 10.24294/jipd.v7i2.2161.
   Google Scholar
• Mirzayeva G, Turkay O, Akbulaev N, Ahmadov F. 2020. The impact of mega-events on urban sustainable development. JESI. 7(3):1653. doi: 10.9770/jesi.2020.7.3(15).
   Google Scholar
• Mitoula R, Papavasileiou A. 2023. Mega infrastructure projects and their contribution to sustainable development: the case of the Athens Metro. Econ Change Restruct. 56(3):1943–1969. doi: 10.1007/s10644-023-09493-w.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MullerMahn D, Mkutu K, Kioko E. 2021. Megaprojects—mega failures? The politics of aspiration and the transformation of rural Kenya. Eur J Dev Res. 33(4):1069–1090. doi: 10.1057/s41287-021-00397-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mylonas C, Xenidis Y. 2018. Megaproject development in the context of sustainable urban regeneration. RELAND Int J Real Estate Land Plan. 1:377–384. doi: 10.26262/reland.v1i0.6499.
   Google Scholar
• Naess P. 1995. Central dimensions in a sustainable urban development. Sustainable Dev. 3(3):120–129. doi: 10.1002/sd.3460030303.
   Google Scholar
• Nair A, Nayar SK. 2020. Key performance indicators of sustainability. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci. 491(1):012047. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/491/1/012047.
   Google Scholar
• Nesticò A, Sica F. 2017. The sustainability of urban renewal projects: a model for economic multi-criteria analysis. J Property Investment & Finance. 35(4):397–409. doi: 10.1108/JPIF-01-2017-0003.
   Google Scholar
• Ninan J, Clegg S, Mahalingam A. 2019. Branding and governmentality for infrastructure megaprojects: the role of social media. Int J Proj Manag. 37(1):59–72. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.10.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orueta FD. 2007. Madrid: urban regeneration projects and social mobilization. Cities. 24(3):183–193. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2006.11.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshimi D, Harada M. 2019. Host residents’ role in sporting events: the city image perspective. Sport Manage Rev. 22(2):263–275. doi: 10.1016/j.smr.2018.04.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paddison R. 1993. City marketing, image reconstruction and urban regeneration. Urban Stud. 30(2):339–350. doi: 10.1080/00420989320080331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pardo G, Del Prado A. 2020. Guidelines for small ruminant production systems under climate emergency in Europe. Small Ruminant Res. 193:106261. doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2020.106261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ponzini D, Santangelo M. 2018. Spatial strategies through land-use plans, urban projects and metropolitan visions: twenty-five years of planning in Turin. Town Plan Rev. 89(3):259–281. doi: 10.3828/tpr.2018.16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramkissoon H, Nunkoo R. 2011. City image and perceived tourism impact: evidence from Port Louis, Mauritius. Int J Hospitality & Tourism Adm. 12(2):123–143. doi: 10.1080/15256480.2011.564493.
   Google Scholar
• Reckien D, Creutzig F, Fernandez B, Lwasa S, Tovar-Restrepo M, Mcevoy D, Satterthwaite D. 2017. Climate change, equity and the sustainable development goals: an urban perspective. Environ Urban. 29(1):159–182. doi: 10.1177/0956247816677778.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehan RM. 2013. Sustainable streetscape as an effective tool in sustainable urban design. HBRC Journal. 9(2):173–186. doi: 10.1016/j.hbrcj.2013.03.001.
   Google Scholar
• Ren X. (2016). Aspirational urbanism from Beijing to Rio de Janeiro: Olympic cities in the global south and contradictions, Journal of Urban Affairs. 39(7):894–908.
   Google Scholar
• Robert KW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA. 2005. What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environ: Sci Policy Sustainable Dev. 47(3):8–21. doi: 10.1080/00139157.2005.10524444.
   Google Scholar
• Rondelez P, Medina García C (2020). Limits of Municipalism. What can we learn from Operación Chamartín? Available online: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/3083168?limo=0 (accessed on 24 November 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Rothengatter W. 2019. Megaprojects in transportation networks. Transp Policy. 75:A1–A15. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.08.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryu C, Kwon Y. 2016. How do mega projects alter the city to Be more sustainable? Spatial changes following the seoul cheonggyecheon restoration project in South Korea. Sustainability. 8(11):1178. doi: 10.3390/su8111178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scipioni A, Mazzi A, Mason M, Manzardo A. 2017. The dashboard of sustainability to measure the local urban sustainable development: the case study of padua municipality. Ecol Indic. 9(2):364–380. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.05.002.
   Google Scholar
• Scherrer W (2002). Information deficiencies in place marketing and the scope for public and private sector partnership: evidence from the city of Salzburg. WIW Working Paper Series No. 6, Salzburg, Germany: Universitat Salzburg.
   Google Scholar
• Schindler S, Fadaee S, Brockington D. 2019. Contemporary megaprojects. An introduction. Environ Soc Adv Res. 10(1):1–8. doi: 10.3167/ares.2019.100101.
   Google Scholar
• Selby M, Morgan JN. 1996. Reconstructuring place image: a case study of its role in destination market research. Tourism Manage. 17(4):287–294. doi: 10.1016/0261-5177(96)00020-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Short JR, Benton LM, Luce WB, Walton J. 1993. Reconstructing the image of an industrial city. Ann Assoc Am Geogr. 83(2):207–224. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1993.tb01932.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith A. 2005. Conceptualizing city image change: the ‘re-imaging’ of Barcelona. Tourism Geogr. 7(4):398–423. doi: 10.1080/14616680500291188.
   Google Scholar
• Song Y, Hou D, Zhang J, O’Connor D, Li G, Gu Q, Li S, Liu P. 2018. Environmental and socio-economic sustainability appraisal of contaminated land remediation strategies: a case study at a mega-site in China. Sci Total Environment. 610:391–401. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sotelo Perez I, Sotelo Perez M, Sotelo Navalpotro JA. 2021. MADRID, NUEVO NORTE”, UN PROYECTO CONTRA LA COVID-19: EL TURISMO COMO OPORTUNIDAD. Cuadernos de Turismo, nº. 47(47):595–598. doi: 10.6018/turismo.474501.
   Google Scholar
• Sroka R. 2021. Mega-projects and mega-events: evaluating Vancouver 2010 stadium and convention infrastructure. Journal Of Sport & Tourism. 25(3):183–200. doi: 10.1080/14775085.2021.1881590.
   Google Scholar
• Stott L, Scoppetta A. 2020. Alianzas para los objetivos: mas alla del ODS 17. Partnerships for the goals: beyond SDG 17. Revista DIE-CISIETE. 2:29–38.
   Google Scholar
• Tarsitano E, Rosa AG, Posca C, Petruzzi C, Mundo M, Colao M. 2020. A sustainable urban regeneration project to protect biodiversity. Urban Ecosyst. 24(4):827–844. doi: 10.1007/s11252-020-01084-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thounaojam N, Laishram B. 2021. Issues in promoting sustainability in mega infrastructure projects: a systematic review. J Environ Plann Manage. 65(8):1349–1372. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2021.1941810.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turcu C. 2013. Re-thinking sustainability indicators: local perspectives of urban sustainability. J Environ Plann Manage. 56(5):695–719. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2012.698984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ugwu O, Haupt T. 2007. Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability—a South African construction industry perspective. Build Environment. 42(2):665–680. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.10.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UN. 2013. Towards sustainable cities: world economic and social survey 2013. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Valentine A, Spangenberg JH. 2000. A guide to community sustainability indicators. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 20(3):381–392. doi: 10.1016/S0195-9255(00)00049-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VanderWeele TJ. 2016. Mediation analysis: a practitioner’s guide. Annu Rev Public Health. 37(1):17–32. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032315-021402.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ward EG, Skayannis P. 2019. Mega transport projects and sustainable development: lessons from a multi case study evaluation of international practice. J Mega Infrastruct Sustainable Dev. 1(1):27–53. doi: 10.1080/24724718.2019.1623646.
   Google Scholar
• WCED. 1987. Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press Common Future. The World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Wheeler S. 1996. Sustainable urban development: a literature review and analysis monograph. Vol. 51, Berkeley, USA: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Wu G, Li H, Wu C, Hu Z. 2020. How different strengths of ties impact project performance in megaprojects: the mediating role of trust. Int J Managing Projects Bus. 13(4):889–912. doi: 10.1108/IJMPB-09-2019-0220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xing Y, Horner RMW, El-Haram MA, Bebbington J. 2009. A framework model for assessing sustainability impacts of urban development. Account Forum. 33(3):209–224. doi: 10.1016/j.accfor.2008.09.003.
   Google Scholar
• Xuefei R. 2008. Architecture as branding: mega project developments in Beijing. Built Environ. 34(4):517–531. doi: 10.2148/benv.34.4.517.
   Google Scholar
• Young C, Lever J. 1996. Place promotion, economic location and the consumption of city image. Tijd voor Econ & Soc Geog. 88(4):332–341. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9663.1997.tb01628.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeng SX, Ma HY, Lin H, Zeng RC, Y VW, Tam VWY. 2015. Social responsibility of major infrastructure projects in China. Int J Proj Manag. 33(3):537–548. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.07.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng L. 2020. Research on the impact of mega-projects on carrying capacity of cities taking the first-line project of the West-East gas pipeline as an example. J Manage Sci Eng. 5(3):195–211. doi: 10.1016/j.jmse.2020.08.001.
   Google Scholar
• Zheng HW, Shen GQ, Wang H. 2014. A review of recent studies on sustainable urban renewal. Habitat Int. 41:272–279. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.08.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu H, Qian J, Gao Y. 2011. Globalization and the production of city image in Guangzhou’s metro station advertisements. Cities. 28(3):221–229. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2010.12.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou Z, Mi C. 2017. Social resposibility research within the context of megaproject management: trends, gaps and opportunities. Int J Proj Manag. 35(7):1378–1390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar