Preipheral Urban Spaces Development

Preipheral Urban Spaces Development

Measuring and analyzing the livability level of rural settlements in peri-urban areas (Case study: isfahan Metropolis)

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Geography and Rural Planning, Faculty of Geographical Sciences and Planning, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran.
Abstract
Today, livability and creating a livable environment in rural areas that guarantees the desirable quality of life for villagers and can provide an active and dynamic environment for the work, residence and leisure of villagers is the main goal of rural development planners because The only way to change the situation of the villages from an environment with low livability and quality of life to an environment with a favorable quality of life is to solve intractable rural problems such as poverty, unemployment and mass migrations. In this regard, in the present applied research, which was carried out with a descriptive-analytical method, the livability of the environments of 8 villages around the metropolis of Isfahan by collecting data in the theoretical part with the documentary method and in the practical part It was measured by a survey method. According to the total number of households in the sample community (N = 5940 households) and with an error of 0.05% in Cochran's formula, a sample size of 360 households was calculated, This research is a quantitative research. To achieve this goal, he uses statistical methods and tests. On the other hand, from the point of view of research classification based on the purpose, it is of applied type. Because it seeks to apply theories, laws, principles and techniques formulated in basic research to solve practical and real problems. Also, in terms of the possibility of controlling the variables, the research is a quasi-experimental type of research, because due to the post-event nature of the research, it is not possible to control the variables completely. The collection of information in the research was based on two library and field methods. In the library method, review of research background and literature was considered, and in the field method, the questionnaire created by the researcher was considered. According to the variables of the research and also the method of analysis, the questionnaire was prepared in the form of open and closed questions and also included spectrums in the form of a Likert spectrum in the nominal and rank measurement scale and in some aspects, an interval, and was given to the participants. But in connection with the data collection tool (questionnaire), to ensure the similarity of the questions taken from previous researches with the variables of the research and to reveal the formal validity of these indicators and its similarity with the villages of the studied area; Academic experts in the field of rural planning were examined. After receiving their opinions, the required parts of the questionnaire were revised and a number of unimportant questions were removed. Cronbach's alpha test was used to check the reliability and reliability of the research questionnaire data. Therefore, first, a sample of 30 questionnaires was distributed in the target population, and according to the Cronbach's alpha value, the final revision of the questionnaire was made and distributed to the relevant sample. Finally, for the present study, the value of Cronbach's alpha for all research variables was 0.79, which has an acceptable level.which were selected by systematic random method from the rural community, and then their analysis was carried out using ‌ inferential methods (chi-square, one-sample t-test, path analysis, Friedman's rank) the obtained results showed that according to the obtained mean of 2.94 and the significant value of 0.006 At the 95% confidence level, he stated that the livability of the studied villages is not at a satisfactory level. Meanwhile, the average livability level of the studied villages was calculated in economic dimension with an average of 2.78, social dimension with an average of 2.92, environmental dimension with an average of 3.16 and physical dimension with an average of 3.01. As can be seen, the economic dimension with the lowest average result has the most unfavorable situation in terms of livability in the studied rural environments. Also, its results showed that this is the economic dimension that has the greatest impact on the formation of the existing situation of the livability level of the studied villages, which is an unfavorable situation. In addition to the fact that the economic dimension has had the greatest impact on this unfavorable situation in a direct way, it has also indirectly and by affecting the unfavorable performance of the physical and environmental dimensions, it has increased the severity of the unfavorable livability of the studied villages.
Keywords

Subjects


افراخته، حسن. جلالیان، حمید. انوری، آرزو و منوچهری، ایوب. ۱۳۹۵.تحلیل نقش سرمایه اجتماعی در زیستپذیری روستاهای ادغام‌شده در شهر میاندوآب، فصلنامه راهبردهای توسعه روستایی. شماره۴. صص 441-415.
ایراندوست، کیومرث. عیسی لو، اصغر و شاهمرادی، بهزاد. 1394. شاخص­های زیستپذیری در محیط­های شهری(مطالعه موردی: بخش مرکزی شهر قم). فصلنامه اقتصاد و مدیریت شهری. شماره 13. صص:118-101.
بندرآباد، علیرضا و احمدی‌نژاد، فرشته. 1392. ارزیابی شاخص­های کیفیت زندگی با تأکید بر اصول شهر زیست پذیر در منطقه 22 تهران. مجله پژوهش و برنامه­ریزی شهری. شماره16. ص55-74.
ثاقبی، محمد، مافی، عزت‌الله و وطن‌پرست، محمد. 1401. ارزیابی و سنجش قابلیت زیست شهری و عوامل مؤثر بر آن (مطالعه موردی شهر بجنورد). تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی.  شماره 22. صص 335-350
جمعه­پور، محمود و تهرانی، شیرزاد. 1392. تبیین میزان زیستپذیری و کیفیت زندگی در روستاهای پیرامون شهری(مطالعه موردی: بخش مرکزی شهرستان شهریار). فصلنامه برنامه­ریزی کالبدی – فضایی، شماره سوم، صص 71-50.
حکیم دوست، سیدیاسر. رستمی، شاه بختی. مرادی، محمود و نظری، عبدالحمید. 1395. تحلیل فضایی پهنههای خطرپذیر زیستی و فعالیتی سکونتگاه­های روستایی مناطق مرزی مطالعه موردی: سکونتگاه­های روستایی شهرستان هیرمند. فصلنامه علمی- پژوهشی اطلاعات جغرافیایی. شماره99، صص 92-71.
خراسانی، محمدامین و رضوانی، محمدرضا. ۱۳۹۲. شناخت و تحلیل تفاوت زیستپذیری روستاهای پیرامون شهری در شهرستان ورامین. فصلنامه اقتصاد فضا و توسعه روستایی. شماره ۲. ص۵۵-۷۴
رشیدی حصاری، اصغر. موحد، علی. تولایی، سیمین و موسوی، میر نجف. ۱۳۹۳. تحلیل فضایی منطقه کلان‌شهری تبریز با رویکرد زیست­پذیری. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی فضای جغرافیایی. شماره ۵۴، صص ۱۵۵-۱۷۶.
ساسان پور، فرزانه. تولایی، سیمین و جعفری اسدآبادی، حمزه. ۱۳۹۳. سنجش و ارزیابی زیستپذیری شهری در مناطق ۲۲ گانه کلان‌شهر تهران، فصلنامه برنامه­ریزی منطقه­ای. شماره۱۸. صص ۲۷_۴۲
شماعی، علی و بیگدلی، لیلا. ۱۳۹۵. ابعاد زیستپذیری در منطقه ۱۷ تهران، فصلنامه جغرافیا(فصلنامه علمی- پژوهشی و بین‎المللی انجمن جغرافیای ایران). شماره۵۰. صص192-171
صادقلو، طاهره و سجاسی قیداری، حمدالله. 1393. بررسی رابطه زیستپذیری سکونتگاه­های روستایی بر تابآوری روستاییان در برابر مخاطرات طبیعی نواحی روستایی دهستان مراوه‌تپه و پالیزان. دو فصلنامه علمی و پژوهشی مدیریت بحران، شماره 6. صص44-37.
منوچهری، سوران و طیب نیا، هادی. 1394. تحلیلی بر پایداری نواحی روستایی در برابر بحران‏های طبیعی و انسانی(مطالعه موردی: بخش خاوومیرآباد مریوان). فصلنامه مخاطرات محیطی. شماره 16. صص:37-21.
Abdulaziz, N. 2007."Linking urban form To a liveable city", Malaysian Journal of Environmental Management, 8 (2007): 101-117.
Blassingame, L. 1998.Sustainable Cities: Oxymoron, Utopia, or Inevitability? The SocialScience Journal, 35 (1): 1-13.
Cedar Hill Municipality. 2008.City of Cedar Hill comprehensive Plan 2008, chapter 5: Livability, pp 5-1 to 5-20.
Fouracre, P. 2001.Transport and sustainable rural livelihoods. Retrieved 2014, June. 19, from http://www.transport-links.org/transport_links/rtkb/rtkb.htm
Ghasemi, K., Hamzenejad, M. and Meshkini, A. 2018. The spatial analysis of the livability of 22 districts of Tehran Metropolis using multi -criteria decision making approaches. Sustainable cities and society. Vol. 38, pp. 382 - 404.
Gough, Meghan. 2015. Reconciling Livability and Sustainability:Conceptual and Practical Implications for Planning, Journal of Planning Education and Research,Vol.35(2),pp145-160
Hankins, K. B. 2009. "The disappearance of the state from Livable" Urban Spaces, Antipode, 41 (5): 845–866.
Iyanda, S.A., Ismail, O., Fabunmi, F.O. 2018. Evaluating Neighborhoods Livability in Nigeria: A Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) Approach. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability, Vol 5‚ No 1, pp. 47 - 55.
LAN, F., Gong, X., Da, H., & Wen, H. 2020. How do population inflow and social infrastructure affect urban vitality? Evidence from 35 large -and medium -sized cities in China. Cities, 100, 102454.
Landry, C. 2004.Urban Vitality: A New source of Urban Competitiveness, prince claus fund journal, ARCHIS issue Urban Vitality / Urban Heroes.
Norris, Tyler and Mary Pittman. 2000. The health community’s movement and the coalition for healthier cities and communities. Public Health Reports115: 118-124.
Ottawa county planning commission. 2004. Ottawa county urban smart growth, planning and grants department.
Song, Y,. 2011. A livable city study in china: using structural Equation models, ph.D, thesis submitted in statistics, department of statistics Uppsala university.
Stein, E. K. 2002. Community and quality of Life, National Academy Press ,Washington, D.C.
Timmer, V., Nola, K. S. 2005. “The World urban forum 2006 Vancouver working group discussion Paper”, International Centre for Sustainable Cities, Washington.
Rivza, B. and Kruzmetra, M. 2017. Through economic growth to the viability of rural space. Entrepreneurship and sustainability issues, 5(2), pp. 283 - 296.
Usad. 2011. Supporting Sustainable Rural Communities Partnership for Sustainable Communities, In collaboration with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.