سنجش ابعاد و شاخص های زیست پذیری شهری (مورد مطالعه: شهر ساری)

فصلنامه علمی و پژوهشی پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهری

دوره 14، شماره 54، آذر 1402، صفحه 1-14   

نوع مقاله: مقاله برگرفته از پایان نامه

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30495/jupm.2021.27915.3874

نویسندگان

اسماعیل تقوی زیروانی¹؛ حسین نظم فر^{* 2}؛ حسین منصوریان³

¹دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل ایران

²استاد گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری و روستایی، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران

³دانشیار گروه جغرافیای انسانی و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

تاریخ دریافت: 11 اردیبهشت 1400،  تاریخ بازنگری: 25 مهر 1400،  تاریخ پذیرش: 26 مهر 1400 

چکیده

هدف از این پژوهش بررسی وضعیت زیست‌پذیری شهر ساری و محلات آن و نیز ارزیابی کلی شهر ازنظر زیست‌پذیری شهری (در چهار بعد زیست‌پذیری شهری یعنی اجتماعی، اقتصادی ، زیست‌پذیری و کالبدی) است. روش مورداستفاده در این تحقیق برای جمع آوری داده ها، دو روش اسنادی و میدانی می باشد. فرآیند جمع‌آوری اطلاعات از طریق ابزار پرسشنامه ودر راستای تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات برآمده از پرسش نامه از آزمون T تک نمونه ای بهره گرفته شده است. یافته های پژوهش نشان می دهد که در شاخص اجتماعی تنها گویه میزان رضایت از همسایگان با میانگین 37/3 و Sig = 0/000 بیشترین رضایت را در میان پاسخگویان داشته است و با قطعیت می‌توان گفت که در میان مؤلفه روابط با همسایگان، بیشترین رضایت در مورد رضایت از روابط همسایگی است. بررسی شاخص زیست محیطی و گویه‌های مربوط به تأسیسات و تجهیزات شهر ساری نشان می دهدکه از میان گویه‌های بررسی‌شده تنها رضایت از شبکه گاز در حد قابل قبولی است و شهروندان با میانگین 25/3 در سطح معناداری 035/0 Sig = رضایت متوسط خود را از سیستم گازرسانی شهری ابراز داشته‌اند. در بررسی مؤلفه کیفیت بصری نیز به همین صورت تمامی گویه‌ها نشان می‌دهند که شهروندان از طراحی و نقشه شهری، سرزندگی محلات و زیبایی بصری و ظاهری شهر و محله رضایت پایینی دارند به‌صورتی که میانگین همه آنها در حدود 5/2 گزارش‌شده که نشان از ضعف کلی در این مؤلفه است. بررسی گویه های مختلف مربوط به مؤلفه های شاخص اقتصادی نشان می دهد که در مورد مؤلفه معیشتی در تمامی گویه‌ها در میان پاسخگویان اتفاق‌نظر وجود دارد که از هیچ گویه‌ای رضایت متوسط ندارند و در تمامی ابعاد معیشتی با سطح پایین رضایت مواجهیم. روی هم رفته می توان نتیجه گرفت که در میان تمامی مؤلفه‌های اصلی سنجش زیست‌پذیری، در شاخص اجتماعی مؤلفه حس تعلق به شهر ساری در شاخص زیست‌محیطی زیست‌پذیری وضعیت فضای سبز و تأسیسات و تجهیزات شهری، در شاخص اقتصادی وضعیت مسکن از میان دیگر مؤلفه‌ها در سطح معناداری 99 درصد در سطح بالاتر از متوسط قرار دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

شهر زیست‌پذیر؛ توسعه پایدار؛ وضعیت اقتصادی؛ اجتماعی؛ زیست‌محیطی

عنوان مقاله [English]

Dimensions and indices of urban livability, case study, Sari

نویسندگان [English]

esmaeil taghavizirvani¹؛ Hossein Nazmfar²؛ Hosin Mansourian³

¹Phd student in Geography and Urban Planning in University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.

²Professor in Geography and Urban Planning in University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.

³Associate Professor Department of human Geography and Planning in University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study is to investigate the viability of Sari city and its neighborhoods and also the general assessment of the city in terms of urban viability (in four dimensions of urban viability, namely social, economic, viability and physical). The method used in this research to collect data are two methods: documentary and field. The data collection process was done through a questionnaire tool and in order to analyze the information obtained from the questionnaire, a one-sample t-test was used.

Findings shows in the social index, only the item of satisfaction with neighbors with an average of 3.37 and Sig = 0.000 had the highest satisfaction among respondents and it can be said with certainty that among the component of relations with neighbors, the highest satisfaction It is about satisfaction with neighborly relations.

The study of environmental index and items related to facilities and equipment of Sari shows that among the items surveyed, only satisfaction with the gas network is acceptable and citizens with an average of 3.25 at a significant level of 0.035 Sig = their average satisfaction with Urban gas supply system have expressed.

In the study of visual quality component, all items show that citizens are low satisfaction with urban design and map, vitality of neighbourhoods and visual beauty of the city and neighborhood, therefore that the average of all of them is reported to be about 2.5, which indicates a general weakness.

It is in this component. Examining the various items related to the components of the economic index shows that there is a consensus among the respondents about the livelihood component in all items that they are not moderately satisfied with any item and we face a low level of satisfaction in all aspects of living.

Overall, it can be concluded that among all the main components of bioavailability, in the social index of the sense of belonging to the city of Sari in the bioenvironmental index of green space and urban facilities and equipment, in the economic index of housing status among other components at a significant level 99% are above average.
Extended Abstract
 
 
Introduction
 
Urban management in metropolitan areas of the country now faces many complex and multifaceted problems, but with a top-down and centralized urban management model based on the classical and new public management paradigms it is practically inadequate to addr The city of Sari , as one of the most populated areas of Mazandaran province , in the process of rapid population growth and the influx of large tourist population to the north of the country in recent years has faced various problems and challenges that affected livability and quality of life in different areas of the city. 
The creation of Halabiabad areas in some parts of the suburbs, as well as low-quality neighborhoods of residents, which mostly include immigrants, as well as differences in neighborhood planning and inequality in their infrastructure in Sari have upset the environmental balance in Sari and the quality of life in new neighborhoods.
Every new constructed neighborhood has it’s speciality, considering this difference, in this research, we will try to study and rank the viability of Sari city areas (in four dimensions of urban viability, namely social, economic, and viability and physical) ess them. Also, in the digital revolutionary space of information technology and social networks, people's expectations of urban management have risen sharply due to insufficient attention to the opinions.
 
Methodology
This research is a descriptive-analytical method and according to the nature of the subject and the indicators studied in this research, the method of archive studies and field study will be used and the research is applied research in regard to research goals.  A researcher-made questionnaire was used to collect the required data and information, and the questions were organized into 5 Likert-scale options based on the specified components. The statistical population in this study includes residents and people in twenty areas of Sari.  To achieve the purpose of the study by studying the research literature, viability indices have been extracted. To analyze the data, SPSS software used in this regard, one-sample t-test was used to measure the viability indices.  Cochran's formula was used to obtain the sample size. Finally, 400 people were selected as the sample size.  Sampling in this study was done in a cluster and random manner among the residents of 20 districts of Sari city, with a quota of 20 samples in each area and a total of 400 samples. To rank the areas of Sari in terms of biodiversity indicators, TOPSIS method has been used and GIS software has been used for spatial analysis of the extent to which Sari areas have creativity indicators.
 
Results and discussion
Today, cities face various problems in the fields of social, economic, cultural, infrastructure, environmental, etc.  So far, various views have been put forward to solve the current problems of cities and provide better living conditions for human beings living in the city. One of the views in the field of urban studies, is livability approach which focuses on the livability in modern cities and is considering different aspects of quality of human life. Using this approach, In this article, we have created one ranking of Sari city areas based on the level of livability indicators.
 
Conclusion
Based on this research the following was obtained:
According to the table above, the viability of Sari urban areas can be judged correctly for all areas together.  Thus, the situation of 5 areas was considered and the level of viability in them was moderate; Areas 2-1, 5-3, 1-3, 5-2 and 2-3.  According to the map, these areas are located in the northern and southern suburbs of the city, and citizens have expressed their high satisfaction with the viability.  On the other hand, 3 areas were in the hands of deprived areas; Areas 4-3, 7-1 and 4-2.  In other areas, too, the priority given was such that they could be placed in the semi-privileged category. 
In total, it can be concluded that 17 out of 20 districts are in a favorable condition of viability, which indicates the average condition of viability in the city of Sari. 
In general, it can be said that the central areas of Sari city are in an unfavorable situation in terms of quality of livability due to the low quality of green space, worn texture, population density, etc., and need more attention. 
The following are suggestions for improving urban livability in Sari:
- Prosperity of unfavorable neighborhood units by creating social and communication spaces of inter-textural development, improvement of historical buildings, protection of landmark elements or public squares.
 - Creating a social space where residents can navigate the distance between work, life, school, shopping, restaurants, parks and other amenities and commercial facilities using walking, cycling and public transportation.
 - Equipping the city with green spaces and its proper distribution in the city.
 - Transfer of public and private offices and organizations from the central parts of the city to the suburbs to reduce traffic in the city center.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

sustainable development, economic, social, environmental indicators

مراجع

References

 

 

1. Bandar Abad, A. (2010). Development of Principles of Spatial Development Pattern and Shape of Iranian Living City Case Study of Districts 1, 15 and 22 of Tehran", Supervisor Hamid Majedi, Consultant Professor Iraj Etesam, Tehran, Islamic Azad University, Research Sciences Branch. [In Persian]
2. Bandarabad, A., & Ahmadinezhad, F. (2014). Assessment of quality of life with emphasis on the principles of habitable cities in the region 22 of Tehran. , 5(16), 55-74. [In Persian]
3.  Clark, D.  (2009) Urban World, World City, translated by Mehdi Gharkhloo and Forough Khazaeinejad, Select Publishing, Tehran. [In Persian]
4. Affolderbach, J., & Schulz, C. (2017). Positioning Vancouver through urban sustainability strategies? The greenest city 2020 action plan. Journal of cleaner production, 164, 676-685.
5. Dajian, Z., & Rogers, P. P., (2010), World Expo and Urban Life Quality in Shanghai in Terms of Sustainable Development: Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 4, 15-22.
6. Antonescu, D. (2017). Liveable city from an economic perspective. Journal of Urban and Landscape Planning, (2), 49-62.
7. Frank, K., & Bank, C. P. (2011). The Wealth Report: A Global Perspective on Prime Property and Wealth. London: Think.
8. Greer, Akbar., Hopkinson, S., and Danaghy, P. (2005), livability Audit of mackay Whitsunday – Region. Technical Report. Mackay Whitsunday Regional Economic Development Corporation (REDC). Mackay
9. Habibi, D. (2013). Investigating the Factors Affecting the Decline of Vitality and Viability in Historical and Worn Textures: A Case Study: Shiraz Black Stone Neighborhood, Iranian Islamic City Studies Quarterly, No. 14, pp. 75-80. [In Persian]
10. Khorasani, M.A. (2011). Explaining the viability of suburban villages with the quality of life approach of a case study of Varamin city" Supervisor Mohammad Reza Rezvani, Consultant Professor Seyed Hassan Motiee Langroudi and Mojtaba Rafieian, Tehran, University of Tehran. [In Persian]
11. Khorasani, M.N. (2014). Living Habitat, Sustainable Habitat, The First Conference on Geographical Sciences of Iran, Tehran, Institute of Geography, May, 5-1. [In Persian]
12. Pacione, M. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human wellbeing—a social geographical perspective. Landscape and urban planning, 65(1-2), 19-30.
13. Pakzad, J. (2007). Theoretical Foundations and Urban Design Process, Shahidi Publications, Second Edition, Tehran. [In Persian]
14. Remy, J. (2015), L'espace, un objet central de la sociologie, Toulouse, Erès, coll. « érès poche -Sociétés urbaines et rurales », 2015, 183 p., préface de Maurice Blanc, ISBN: 978-2-7492-4899-8.
15. Shamsuddin, S., Hassan, N. R. A., & Bilyamin, S. F. I. (2012). Walkable environment in increasing the liveability of a city. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 167-178.
16. Sasanpour, F., Tulayi, S., and Jafari Asadabadi, H. (2013). The viability of cities in the direction of sustainable urban development (Case study: Tehran metropolis), Geography (Scientific-Research Quarterly and International Quarterly of the Iranian Geographical Society) New Volume, Twelfth Volume, No. 42, 129-157. [In Persian]
17. Timmer, V., & Seymoar, N. K., (2005), Vancouver Working Group Discussion Pape, In the World Urban Forum 2006.
18. Van Kamp, P. (2003). the van kamp Acbievemery: urban Design and phowing.www.camsys.com/kb experts-livability. Htms