Preipheral Urban Spaces Development

Preipheral Urban Spaces Development

Assessing the sustainability of rural settlements around the city of Urmia (South Nazlo Chai village)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2 Ph.D. Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Geography Education, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran
4 Master's degree, Department of Geography, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Extended Abstract :

Introduction

Rural settlements in Iran have been formed according to the local knowledge and have developed their own evolutionary process according to the system of Hud formation during the past thousands of years. It has been created in rural settlements, but the process of multiple sustainability can be considered and comprehensively investigated, a process that has many reasons and has been able to bring about the stability of rural settlements in Iran and its territorial geography. Also in The modern period of Iran, which has been transformed in accordance with the global system, the rural system of Iran has also seen a drastic transformation and has witnessed profound changes in its settlements. and measured their instability. On this basis and according to the topic of the present research, the process of investigating the stability of rural settlements around the city of Urmia (Nazlu South Chai village) has been evaluated, which has been analyzed with five dimensions and components. For this purpose, which has been accepted as a research process, regular scientific steps have been taken and the level of sustainability in this area has been carefully analyzed.

Methodology:

The above research was conducted in order to measure the sustainability of rural settlements around the city of Urmia. The type of research is applied and the research method is descriptive-analytical. The method of collecting documentary, library and field information from 9 villages of South Chai Nazloi Dehistan has been. From the total population of 1247 households, 214 households were selected as samples. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The results of the research showed that the level of sustainability is different in economic, social and environmental dimensions. At the level of the studied villages, the most sustainability is related to the social component (with an average rank of 3.45) and it has played the biggest role in rural sustainability. After that, the physical-spatial component (with an average rating of 2.74), the environmental component (with an average rating of 2.16) and the economic component (with an average rating of 1.65) are in the next ranks. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to all aspects of sustainability, especially in indicators where sustainability is lower than average.

Results and discussion:

Measuring the sustainability of tea in Nazlu district with 5 components has been discussed and fully investigated in the form of statistical tests that show different results. Based on this and according to the 50 items analyzed in Nazlu district It was found that the significance level of each of the components is different from each other and it is completely different based on the opinion of the people who were measured.

Conclusion:

Sustainable development and sustainability assessment are mainly considered two inseparable pillars. The results of the research show: the level of sustainability in the study area is different in economic, social and environmental dimensions, and at the level of the studied villages, the most sustainable is the social component (with an average rank of 3.45), followed by the physical component. - Spatial (with an average rating of 2.74), environmental component (with an average rating of 2.16) and economic component (with an average rating of 1.65) are in the next categories. With an average of (3.22), it has the most stable results in terms of physical-spatial indicators. Chichkalvi village of Haji Agha with an average of (3.11), Bezlo village (3.10), Asgar Abad Tiyeh village (2.95), Zaye Kandi village with an average of (2.95) ranking in terms of social indicators in the sustainability of Nazloi villages South play a role. Also, based on the results obtained from the ANOVA test, it shows that Haji Agha village of Chichkalvi has the most sustainable results in terms of economic indicators with an average of (2.91). Bazlo village with an average of (2.60), Arablovi Yakan village (2.57), Asgar Abad Tiye village (2.50), Zaye Kandi village with an average (2.50), Saidelo village (2.47), Samsalu village with an average of 2.45, Dastjard village with an average of 2.24, and Taze Kand village of Afshar with an average of 2.04 respectively have a role in the stability of southern Nazlo villages in terms of economic indicators. In the environmental field, the village of Chichakloi Haji Agha has the highest sustainability results in terms of environmental indicators with an average of (3.33). and Saidalo villages with an average of (2.66), Asgarabad Tiyeh village (2.65), Samsalo village (2.55), Zaye Kandi village with an average of (2.55), Taze Kand village of Afshar (2.42), Dastjard with an average of 2.37, Arablovi Yakan village with an average of 2.28, and Bezlo village with an average of 2.03 have played a role in the sustainability of southern Nazloi villages, respectively, in terms of environmental indicators. Also, there is a significant and positive relationship between sustainability and economic, social and environmental dimensions as well as sustainable rural development at the alpha level of 0.01%. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to all dimensions of sustainability, especially in indicators where sustainability is lower than average.
Keywords

Subjects


اصغری، سیدعلی.1397. پایداری: تقیید توسعه؟. فصلنامه مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای درعلوم انسانی .10(3).99-65- https://doi.org/10.22035/isih.2018.283
امیرزاده مرادآبادی، سمیرا و همکاران.1397. ارزیابی پایداری کشاورزی در ایران با استفاده از شاخص ترکیبی پایداری، مجله تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی ایران دوره .2-49 شماره 4. ijaedr.2018.252301.668565
پور طاهری و همکاران.1389. بررسی و سنجش پایداری اجتماعی روستایی دهستان حومه شهرستان خدابنده با استفاده از تکنیک رتبه‌بندی بر اساس تشابه به حل ایدئال فازی.  فصلنامه روستا و توسعه .چاپ اول، ص19. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/179864
توکلی، جعفر . 1393. سنجش پایداری اجتماعی ـ اقتصادی سکونتگاه‌های روستایی دهستان‌های خاوه شمالی و جنوبی، استان لرستان، نشریه تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی. سال چهاردهم، شماره 32. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/331467
جمعه پور، محمود. 1389. مقدمه‌ای بر برنامه‌ریزی توسعه روستایی. دیدگاه­ها و روش­ها، تهران. سمت.
جوان، فرهاد، واعظ طبسی، علی، هاشمی زهی، سودابه، میرکی اناری، حسین. 1395. سنجش میزان پایداری امنیت اجتماعی در سکونتگاه­های روستایی مطالعه موردی روستاهای مرزی هیرمند، پژوهشنامه جغرافیای انتظامی، 4(15)، 82-57.
حجت شمامی، سیروس و جوان، فرهاد. 1401. اکوتوریسم و پایداری محیط‌زیست روستایی در شهرستان رودبار. مطالعات مدیریت توسعه سبز، 1(2)، 59-72. doi: 10.22077/jgmd.2023.6082.1018
خسروبیگی وهمکاران . 1390 . ارزیابی پایداری روستاهای شهرستان کمیجان با استفاده از تکنیک چندمتغیره فازی- تاپسیس  . فصلنامه پژوهش‌های روستایی .سال دوم  . شماره یکم. بهار 1390، 158-151. http://ensani.ir/fa/article/231348
رکن‌الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا . بدری.سید علی. 1382. ارزیابی پایداری ازمفهوم تا عمل. دانشگاه تربیت مدرس. فصلنامه تحقیقات جغرافیایی. شماره 69.
ریاحی، وحید. عزیزپور؛ فرهاد.نوری، آذر. 1395. تحلیل سطح پایداری محیطی سکونتگاه‌های روستایی در شهرستان خرمدره.راهبردهای توسعه روستایی. 3(10).صص173-155. https://doi.org/10.22048/rdsj.2016.38655
شایان، حمید، حسین زاده،. سید رضا. 1390. ارزیابی پایداری توسعه روستایی. مطالعه موردی. شهرستان کمیجان، جغرافیا و توسعه. شماره 24 10.22111/gdij.2011.530
عطایی، سیاوش، افراخته، حسن وجوان، فرهاد. 1400. سنجش پایداری عرصه­های پیراشهری با تأکید بر نقش مدیریت روستایی مورد: بخش کهریزک. مجله توسعه فضاهای پیراشهری، 3(2)، 47-66. 20.1001.1.26764164.1400.3.2.2.8
علیانی، محمدصادق.1390. علل توسعه‌نیافتگی روستایی ایران ازنظر سرمایه انسانی و سرمایه اجتماعی مطالعه ممردی ثمرستان دیواندره. شماره 35 .انجمن جغرافیای ایران، تهران. صص 140-131. https://www.sid.ir/paper/150179/fa
فتحی پور فرد ، جواد .1388. مقایسه تطبیقی توسعه‌یافتگی روستاهای شهرستان اهر. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد رشته جغرافیا. ص1.
فراهانی، حسین 1385. ارزیابی پایداری در نواحی روستایی با تأکید برعوامل اجتماعی و اقتصادی. مطالعه موردی . شهرستان تفرش .رساله دکترا دانشگاه تهران . دانشکده جغرافیا گروه جغرافیای انسانی . تهران.
قنبری، سیروس. نادریان فر، مهدی.1397. ارزیابی عملکرد دهیاران در پایداری محیطی روستاها .مطالعه موردی.. بخش مرکسی شهرستان نیمروز. دانشگاه رازی کرمانشاه. فصلنامه جغرافیا و پایداری محیط. صص45-31 .https://journals.razi.ac.ir/article_916.html
مطیعی لنگرودی ، سید حسن. ارسطو یاری.1389.حفاظت محیط‌زیست و برنامه‌ریزی توسعه فیزیکی روستا با تأکید بر ارزیابی طرح‌های هادی روستایی. جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی محیطی. سال 21 شماره 39 ص 45 – 60 . https://www.sid.ir/paper/153095/fa
مفیدی شمیرانی، سید مجید. افتخاری‌مقدم. علی .1388. توسعه پایدار شهری، دیدگاه‌ها و اصول اجرایی آن در کشورهای درحال‌توسعه. فصلنامه ساخت شهری. سال ششم. شماره . ص1212. https://www.sid.ir/paper/462320/fa
یزدانی ، محمدحسن.  فرزانه سادات زارنجی.  ژیلا. یاری حصار.  ارسطو .1398. سنجش سطح پایداری در سکونتگاه‌های غیررسمی شهر اردبیل به کمک مدل بارومتر پایداری. نشریه پژوهش‌های جغرافیای برنامه­ریزی شهری. دوره:7،شماره3.صص628-601. 10.22059/jurbangeo.2019.279707.1088
یاری حصار، ارسطو . سید علی بدری. مهدی پور طاهری. حسنعلی فرجی سبکبار 1390. سنجش و ارزیابی پایداری حوزه روستایی کلانشهر تهران. نشریه پژوهش های روستایی2.(4): 148-127. https://www.sid.ir/paper/180945/fa
Bossel . H .1999..indicators for sustainable development .Theory ,method , Applications. A Report to the Balaton . Group .IISD . Canada. p24.
Eusébio. Celeste. Kastenholz. Elisabeth. Breda. Zélia .2019. Tourism And Sustainable Development of Rural Destinations. Revista Portuguesa de Estudos Regionais. Associação Portuguesa para o Desenvolvimento Regional. pp: 14-21.
Fleischer, T. .2004. Sustainable Settlement Criteria. Eco-Cities and Prospects in Central Europe, Hungarian Academy of Science. Working Paper. No. 145.,p7-5.
Gottdiencer. Mark. Budd. Leslie .2005. Key Concepts in Urban Studies. Sage Publication.
Hall.T. 2001. urban geographi. 2nd ed.. London and new york: routledge.
Leng Liu. Bo Liu .Wei Song andHao Yu..2023. Land Use Change and Anthropogenic Disturbances. Relationships, Management. and Policies. Land .12(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/land12081617
Hiremath. B. et al. 2013. Indicator-Based Urban Sustainability-A Review.Energy for Sustainable Development. Vol. 17. No. 6. PP. 555-563.
. Kaur. P. Parashar. A. A Systematic Literature Review of Blockchain Technology for Smart Villages. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2022, 29, 2417–2468.
Lekić1. Olivera. Gadžić. Nebojša& Milovanović. Anja.2018. Sustainability of Rural Areas . Exploring Values.Challenges. and Socio-Cultural Role. In book: Sustainability and Resilience Socio-Spatial Perspective (pp.171)Publisher: TU Delft Open.
Long. H. Zou. J.. Pykett. J. Li. Y. Analysis of rural transformation development in China since the turn of the new millennium. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 1094–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Mansell .P. Philbin. S. P. & Konstantinou, E.2020. Redefining the use of sustainable development goals at the organisation and project levels.a survey of engineers. Administrative Sciences. 10(3).1-39.
Mori. K. Christodulou. A. .2011. Review of Sustainability Indices and Indicators: Towards a New City Sustainability Index (CSI). Environmental Impact Assessment Review. pp. 1-13.
Nelson. K.S. Nguyen. T.D. Francois. J.R.. Ojha. S. Rural sustainability methods, drivers, and outcomes: A systematic reviewSustain. Dev. 2023. 31. 1226–1249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Pripco. C. 2005. Stainabledevelopment. Availableat:www.ingham.org/ce/ced/ article.
Wang. C.C.. Miao. J.T.. Phelps. N.A.. Zhang. J. E-commerce and the transformation of the rural: The taobao village phenomenon in Zhejiang Province. China. J. Rural Stud. 2021.81. 159–169.
Widomski. M.K & Musz-Pomorska. A.2023. .Sustainable Development of Rural Areas in Poland since 2004 in the Light of Sustainability Indicators. Land.12.508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef].
Xuemei. B. Peijun. S. Yansui. L. Realizing China’s urban dream. Nature 2014. 509. 158–160. [Google Scholar].
Zhao.W. Liang. Z. Li B. Realizing a Rural Sustainable Development through a Digital Village Construction: Experiences from China. Sustainability .2022, 14, 14199. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14211419
Zeller. Manfred .2005. Pathways of Rural Development in Madagascar: An Empirical Investigation of the Critical Triangle of Environmental Sustainability, Economic.