تبیین زیست پذیری محیطی سکونتگاه های روستایی پیرامون کلان شهر رشت

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه ‏ریزی روستایی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران

2 استادیار گروه جغرافیا، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران

3 استاد گروه جغرافیا، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران

چکیده

از آنجا که زیست‏پذیری مقدمه‏ای لازم برای دست‏یابی به توسعة پایدار است، امروزه، ارزیابی و سنجش آن در حوزة برنامه‏ریزی و سیاست‏گذاری برای سکونتگاه‏های روستایی بسیار مورد توجه قرار گرفته است. زیست‏پذیری شامل ابعاد مختلفی مانند محیطی، اجتماعی- فرهنگی، اقتصادی، نهادی- مدیریتی، و کالبدی است که ارزیابی و بهبود هر بُعد در دست‏یابی به سکونتگاه زیست‏پذیر لازم و ضروری است. هدف از پژوهش حاضر تبیین زیست‏پذیری محیطی روستاهای پیرامون کلان‏شهر رشت است. نوع پژوهش کاربردی، روش مورد استفادةآن توصیفی- تحلیلی،و داده‏ها با استفاده از منابع اسنادی و مطالعات میدانی گردآوری شده است. جامعة آماری این پژوهش روستاهای پیرامون کلان‏شهر رشت است. برای ارزیابی زیست‏پذیری محیطی، پنج مؤلفة فضای سبز، آلودگی‏ها (کیفیت محیط)، کیفیت بصری، چشم‏انداز و منظر روستایی، و تاب‏آوری (28 گویه) شناسایی شد. سپس،با کمک روستاییان، مدیران روستایی، و شناخت محدودة مورد مطالعه اطلاعات مورد نیاز جمع‏آوری شد. در این پژوهش از آزمون T تک‏نمونه برای اثبات معناداری و قابلیت تعمیم نتایج پژوهش استفاده شد. در نهایت، به کمک تحلیل رگرسیون مشخص شد شاخص‏های محیطی بر زیست‏پذیری سکونتگاه‏های روستایی مؤثر بوده که در این میان بیشترین تاثیر مربوط به شاخص تاب‏آوری و کمترین آن مربوط به شاخص فضای سبز بوده است. همچنین، در نهایت، روستاهای مورد مطالعه در پنج سطح خیلی مطلوب، مطلوب، مطلوبیت متوسط، نامطلوب، و خیلی نامطلوب سطح‏بندی شد که در این میان روستای آلمان در بالاترین و روستای کرچوندان در پایین‏ترین سطح از نظر زیست‏پذیری محیطی قرار دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Explanation of environmental livability of rural settlements around Rasht metropolis

نویسندگان [English]

  • maryam alinaghipour 1
  • isa pourramzan 2
  • Nasrollah Molaey Hashjin 3
1 teacher
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography ,Rasht Branch ,Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
3 Professor
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction: Today Livability is an Introduction to Sustainable Development so much attention has been paid to assessment and evaluation in the field of planning and policy for rural settlements. Livability includes various dimensions such as environmental, socio-cultural, economic, institutional-management and physical that will evaluate and improve each dimension for achieving a livable habitat. The goal of this research is explaining environmental livability of villages around the Rasht metropolis. The research type is applied, used method is descriptive-analytical and data are collected using documentary resources and field studies. The statistical population of this research is villages around the Rasht metropolis. To assess environmental livability, recognized 5 components including green space, pollution(environmental quality), visual quality, landscape and rural perspective and resilient(28 items) that required information gathered by getting help of villagers, rural managers and identify the scope of study.
Methodology: In this study Dehyars and supervisors of households living (using random sampling) selected as responsive to questionnaires which is designed. To assess the validity of the questionnaire, previous studies and the approval of experts in the field of rural studies and to assess the reliability of questionnaires Cronbach's alpha method were used.The result(0.731) shows the reliability of the questionnaire to conduct the research. After ensuring the results of the questionnaire, it has been designed to collect information and analyze descriptive statistics and then for inferential statistics try to create index. For this purpose, items first were rounded and then negative items was changed to positive ones, because we need same value indicators to measure in order to make correct comparison. In order to convert negatives items to positive ones, they must be reduced to a constant number or reversed. In this study, the inverse method was used. To complete the indexation process should fix scale differences for getting the numeric information. For this purpose we Use standardize method and then weigh the indicators. To assess the weight has used judgments opinion method. A questionnaire is filled up for each village with the help of well-known and expert people where it is considered to be one to ten numbers for each component and finally the average weights are obtained and then the numbers are considered in the range of 1-3 Where 3 is the most weight. Finally, the weight is achieved apply in the scaled-up indexes and mean and standard deviation of the indicators will calculate and further research steps these indicators are used to carry out quantitative operations.
Result and discussion: results show ,respectively, the manner and quality of waste collection from the village surface with an average of 3.85, natural beauty eye with an average of 3.78, air pollution (no air pollution is aimed because the score is changed from negative to positive) with an average of 3.36 have the highest average and enjoyment and quality of children's play space with an average of 0.09, having a sewage disposal system with an average of 1.77, the quality of collecting wastewater with an average of 2.10 have the lowest Average. The high average shows the satisfaction of the respondents and the possibility of greater impact on rural viability. To determine the effect of independent variable (environmental dimension) on dependent variable (livability) used of bivariate regression (simple linear regression) with the same way method. Test results show that amount of determination coefficient statistics (variance explained by the set of variables) is equal to 0.593 and it means that 59.3 percent of the variation in livability is explained by the environmental dimension and this reflects the impact of this dimension. F statistic is 50.935 which is meaningful up to a thousandth and represents the dependence of the livability on this dimension. In other words, environmental indicators have an impact on livability. In the following, by examining the results of the indexation find that among the studied indicators, resilient index with a score of 9.49 is the highest and green area index with a score of 3.137 is the lowest score. Highest score of livability in the environmental dimension belongs to the Alman village and lowest score has been allocated to the Karchovandan village. And finally are Leveled villages which are studied in five levels including very desirable, desirable, moderate, undesirable and very undesirable.
Conclusion: With the help of field surveys and documentation and by identifying environmental components and items in rural settlements around the Rasht metropolis was found that villagers are satisfied from the type and quality of waste collection from the village surface, beautiful natural eye, non-contamination more than other components and in opposite they are not satisfied from the enjoyment and quality of children's play space, sewage disposal system, collection quality of sewage. After identifying the items and collecting data were taken indicative steps and with the help of a single sample T test identify that indicators can be generalized to the whole society and then with the help of regression analysis the effect of environmental dimension on livability is shown. By using the mean of indexes, resilient index has the most effective benchmark and greenhouse index has the least effective index, Alman village has the highest livability rate and Karchovandan village has the lowest livability scores. In the following, studied villages are ranked at five levels of livability (Based on average score). According to this level, the villages of Talamseshanbe, Alman, Bijarbane at very desirable livability level(6.60-7.17), Kasar, Pirkolachah at desirable livability level(6.04-6.60), Fashtam, Gilpordesar, Pasikhan, Piledarbon, Garfam, Shekarestalkh, Pachkenar at moderate livability(5.47-6.04), Dareposht, Keshalvarzal, Varazgah, Koleshtaleshan, Kheshtmasjed, Balakoyakh, Roknsara, Lachegorab, Shalkoh, Kizhdeh, Bijarpas, Kisarvarzal, Vishkavarzal, Pasvishe, Tazeabad, Siaestalkh, Komakol, Mangode at undesirable livability level(4.91-5.47) and Rodborde, Tarazkoh, Tochipaybast, Karchovandan, Gorabvarzal, Ravajir, Vishkamatir at very undesirable livability level(4.91-5.47) are located.
Keywords: Explanation, Livability, Rural settlements, Environmental livability, Rasht Metropolis.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Explanation
  • livability
  • rural settlements
  • Environmental livability
  • Rasht Metropolis
ایران‏دوست، کیومرث؛ عیسی‏لو، علی‏اصغر و شاهمرادی، بهزاد، 1394، شاخص زیست‏پذیری در محیط شهری (مطالعة موردی: بخش مرکزی شهر مقدس قم)، فصل‏نامة علمی- پژوهشی اقتصاد و مدیریت شهری، س ۴، ش۱۳، صص 11۰-11۸.
جمعه‏پور، محمود و طهماسبی تهرانی، شهرزاد، 1392، تبیین میزان زیست‏پذیری و کیفیت زندگی در روستاهای پیرامون شهری (مطالعة موردی بخش مرکزی شهرستان شهریار)، فصل‏نامة برنامه‏ریزی کالبدی- فضایی، س ۱، ش ۳، شمارة استاندارد بین‏المللی 4118-2322، صص ۴۹-60.
خراسانی، محمدامین؛ رضوانی، محمدرضا؛ مطیعی لنگرودی، سیدحسن و رفیعیان، مجتبی، 1391، سنجش و ارزیابی زیست‏پذیری روستاهای پیرامون شهری (مطالعة موردی: شهرستان ورامین)، فصل‏نامة پژوهش‏های روستایی، س ۳، ش ۴، صص ۷۹-104.
خراسانی، محمدامین و رضوانی، محمدرضا، 1392، سنجش و ارزیابی مؤلفه‏های زیست‏پذیری در سکونتگاه‏های روستایی پیرامون شهری (بررسی موردی: شهرستان ورامین)، فصل‏نامة توسعة روستایی، دورة پنجم، ش 1، صص ۸۹-110.
خراسانی، محمدامین، 1395، تأملی در مفهوم زیست‏پذیری؛ شناخت، سنجش، و رویکردها، ماهنامة شباک (شبکة اطلاعات کنفرانس‏های کشور)، س ۲، ش 1 (پیاپی 8)، ج. 4، صص ۱۱-18.
خراسانی، محمدامین و رضوانی، محمدرضا، 1392، تحلیل ارتباط زیست‏پذیری روستاهای پیرامون شهری با برخورداری خدماتی (مطالعة موردی شهرستان ورامین)، مجلة علمی‏- پژوهشی برنامه‏ریزی فضایی (جغرافیا)، س ۳، ش ۳، پیاپی 10، صص ۱-۱۶.
ساسان‏پور، فرزانه؛  تولایی، سیمین و جعفری اسدآبادی، حمزه، 1393، قابلیت زیست‏پذیری شهرها در راستای توسعة پایدار شهری (مورد مطالعه: کلان‏شهر تهران)، جغرافیا (فصل‏نامة علمی- پژوهشی و بین‏المللی جغرافیای ایران)، دورة جدید، س ۱۲، ش 42، صص ۱۲۸-۱۵۷.
سلیمانی مهرنجانی، محمد؛  تولایی، سیمین؛ رفیعیان، مجتبی؛  زنگانه، احمد و خزاعی‏نژاد، فروغ، 1395، زیست‏پذیری شهری: مفهوم، اصول، ابعاد، و شاخص‏ها، فصل‏نامة پژوهش‏های جغرافیای برنامه‏ریزی شهری، دورة 4، ش 1، صص ۲۷-50.
علیزاده، سجاد، 1393، سنجش عوامل زیست‏پذیری با تأکید بر رویکرد مشارکت (مطالعة موردی: محلة بریانک منطقة 10 شهرداری تهران)، پایان‏نامة کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشکدة هنر و معماری.
مژگان، نگاره، 1395، بررسی مؤلفة زیست‏پذیری شهری با تأکید بر شاخص‏های جهانی در شهر پاوه، پایان‏نامة کارشناسی ارشد، وزارت علوم، تحقیقات، و فناوری، دانشگاه زابل، دانشکدة ادبیات و علوم انسانی.
11. A submission commenting on VCEC’s draft report on liveability, 2008, Response to A State of Liveability, Public transport users association, MelbourneVIC 3000.
12. Alexander, Todd, 2014, Economic Value of Walkability, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Vol. 10, No. 1, PP. 1-31.
13. Alizadeh, Sajad, 2014, Evaluating the Livability factors with emphasis on the partnership approach (Case study: Beryanak neighborhood of 10 district of Tehran municipality), Master's Degree in Islamic Azad University, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch,College of Arts and Architecture.
14. Australian Government, 2012, State of Australian Cities 2012, Chapter 5 Liveability, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, PP.  203-277
15. Hankins, Katherine B. and Emily M. Powers, 2009, The Disappearance of the State from “Livable” Urban Spaces, Journal compilation, Editorial Board of Antipode, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00699.x, Vol. 41, No. 5 , PP.  845-866.
16. Badland, Hannah; Carolyn Whitzman; Melanie Lowe; Melanie Davern; Lu Aye; Latin Butterworth; Dominique Hes and Billie Giles-Corti, 2014, Urban Liveability: Emerging Lesson From Australian for exploring the potential for indicators to measure the social determinants of health, Social Science and Medicine, No. 111, PP. 64-73.
17. Cao, Xinyu (Jason), 2016, How does neighborhood design affect life satisfaction? Evidence from Twin Cities, Travel Behaviour and Society journal, No. 5, PP. 68-76.
18. Cedar Hill, Municipality, 2008, City of Cedar Hill comprehensive Plan , livability, chapter 5 ,1-24.
19. Chand Sandhu, Sonia; Ramola Naik Singru; John Bachmann; Vaideeswaran Sankaran and Pierre Arnoux, 2016, Green Solutions For Livable Cities, Asian Development Bank, Printed in the Philippines.
20. Economist intelligence unit, 2015, A summary of the Livabileality Ranking and Overview, city rankings, prepare for opportunity Economist intelligence unit.
21. Fabish, Lisa, 2010, Measuring the Performance of Livability Programs, A Thesis Quality Research Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Masters of Science in Transportation Management.
22. Faiz, Asif; Faiz, Aysha; Wang, Wei and Bennett, Christopher, 2012, Sustainable rural roads for livelihoods and livability, Journal Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, No. 53, PP. 1-8.
23. Gough, Meghan Z., 2015, Reconciling Livability and Sustainability:Conceptual and Practical Implications for Planning, Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 35, No. 2, PP. 145-160.
24. Grant, Michael; Harrison Rue; Stephanie Trainor; Jocelyn Bauer; Jamie Parks; Mary Raulerson; Kathleen Rooney and Sonya Suter, 2012, The Role of Transportation Systems Management and Operations in Supporting Livability and Sustainability, A Primer, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
25. Hasan, Lubna, 2007, Cities and Quality of Life-Should We Monitor Pakistani Cities?, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, MPRA, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, PP.1-18.
26. Iaquinta, David L. and Drescher, Axel W., 2000, Defining Peri-urban: Understanding Rural-Urban Linkages and Their Connection to Institutional Context, The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, April 2000,1-26.
27. Idrus, Shaharudin and Samad Hadi, Abdul, 2008, Spatial urban metabolism for livable city, Blueprints for Sustainable Infrastructure Conference 9-12 December 2008 Auckland, NZ, PP. 1-12.
28. Irandost, Kiomars, IsaLo, Ali asghar and Shahmoradi, Behzad, 2015, Livability Index in Urban Environment (Case Study: Central Section of Qom Holy City), Scientific-Research quarterly of Urban Economics and Management,Fourth Year, N0. 13, PP. 110-118.
29. Jome Pour, Mahmoud and Tahmasebi Tehrani, Shahrzad, 2013, Explanation of the rate of Livability and quality of life in urban villages(Case study of central part of Shahriar city), Physical-Space Planning Quarterly, First Year, No. 3, International Standard Number 4118-2322, PP. 49-60.
30. Kennedy, Rosemary and Buys, Laurie, 2010, Dimensions of Liveability: A Tool for Sustainable Cities, SB 10 mad, sustainable building conference, PP. 1-11.
31. Khee Giap, Tan; Wing Thye, Woo and Aw, Grace, 2014, A new approach to measuring the liveability of cities:the Global Liveable Cities Index, World Review of Science, Technology and Sust. Development, Vol. 11, No. 2, PP. 176-196.
32. Khorasani, Mohammad Amin and Rezvani, Mohammad Reza, 2013, Analysis of the relationship between urban viability of villages and having service (Case study of Varamin city), Space Planning research scientific journal(Geography), Third Year, No. 3, Successive 10, PP.  1-16.
33. Khorasani, Mohammad Amin and Rezvani, Mohammad Reza, 2013, Measurement and evaluation Livability Components in rural settlements around the city (Case study: Varamin City), Rural Development Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 1, PP. 89-110.
34. Khorasani, Mohammad Amin, 2016, Thinking about Livability concept; Recognition, Measurement and Approaches, Shabak Monthly (Information Network of Conferences of the Country),Year 2, No. 1 (8th series), Vol. 4, PP. 11-18.        
35. Khorasani, Mohammad Amin; Rezvani, Mohammadreza;  Motiee Langroudi, Seyyed Hasan and Rafieyan, Mojtaba, 2012, Measuring and assessing the Livability of villages around the city (case study: Varamin city), Quarterly Rural Researchers, Third Year, No. 4, PP.  79-104.
36. Litman, Todd Alexander, 2011, Well measured: Developing indicators for sustainable and livable transport planning, Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
37. Mahmoudi, Mohadeseh; Ahmad, Faizah and Abbasi, Bushra, 2015, Livable streets: The effects of physical problems on the quality and livability of Kuala Lumpur streets, Journal Cities, No. 43, PP. 104-114.
38. McCormick, Mike; Virginia Gunby; Dennie Houle; Glenn Miles; Maggie Fimia; Richendrfer Richendrfer; Sandra Nourse-Madson; Rebecca Chaffee; Leonard Pittman; Brian Ziegler; Tom Green; Dave McCormick; Chris Rose and Rosemary Nye and Shari Schaftlein, 2017, Livable Communities Policy, The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), PP.1-7.
39. McGregor, Duncan; David Simon and Donald Thompson, 2006, The Peri-urban Interface; Approaches to Sustainable Natural and Human Resource Use. Published by Earthscan in the UK and US .
40. Mercer company, 2017, mercer's quality of living ranking 2017, 14 March 2017 ,United Kingdom, London
41. Negare, Mojgan, 2016, Investigating the component of urban viability with emphasis on global indicators in the city of Paveh, Master's thesis, By the guidance of Akbar Kiani,Consultant Gholam Ali Khamar, Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, University of Zabol, Faculty of Literature and Humanities.
42. Newton, Peter W., 2012, Liveable and Sustainable?Socio-Tecchnical Challenges for Twenty-First-Cntury Cities, Journal of Urban Technology, Vol. 19, PP. 81-102.
43. Nour, Walaa, 2015, Towards Sustainability in the Livable City, International Transaction Journal of Engineering, Management and Applied Sciences and Technologies, Vol. 6, No. 4, PP. 145-155.
44. Randhawa, Aman and Kumar, Dr. Ashwani, 2017,  Exploring Livability as a dimension of Smart City Mission (India), International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), Vol. 04, No. 11, PP.  277-285.
45. Resilient Melbourne, 2016, Viable sustainable livable prosperous, Pioneered by the Rockefeller foundation, 100 Resilient cities.
46. Rue, H.; Lisa McNally; Kathleen Rooney; Pepper Santalucia; Mary Ra Jane Lim-Yap; Joel Mann and Dan Burden, 2011, Livability in Transportation Guidebook,Planning Approaches that Promote Livability, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC: FHWA.
47. Rue, Harrison;  Rooney, K.; Dock, S.; Ange, K.; Twaddell, H. and Poncy, A., 2011, The Role of FHWA Programs In Livability: State of the Practice Summary, Requested by U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
48. Sasanpour, Farzane;  Tuliya, Simin and Jafari AsadAbadi, Hamze, 2014, City Livability Ability In line with urban sustainable development(Case Study: Tehran Metropolis), Geography (Scientific-Research Quarterly and International Geography of Iran), New Year, Year 12, No. 42, PP. 129-157.
49. Scheidl, Michael and Kai So and Ryan Edwards, 2015, Village of Galahad Viability Review, Viability Plan, Alberta Municipal Affairs, Government of Alberta,Printed in Canada, Print Version ISBN No.: 978-1-4601-2339-3.
50. Soleimani Mehranjani, Mohammad;  Tullayi, Simin; Rafian, Mojtaba;  Zanganeh, Ahmad and Khazaeinejad, Forogh, 2016, Urban Livability: Concept, Principles, Dimensions and Indicators, Geography research Quarterly of urban Planning, Vol. 4, No. 1, PP. 27-50.
51. Song, Yang, 2011, A livable city study in china: using structural Equation models, thesis submitted in statistics, department of statistics Uppsala university
52. Southworth, Michael, 2011, Measuring the livable city. Built Environment, Vol. 29, No. 4, PP. 343-354.
53. Thorin, Amanda, 2017, Livable Centers Study for the City of Mont Belvieu, RFP Number: TRN17-02, Houston-Galveston Area Council, PP. 1-26.
54. Timmer, Vanessa and Seymoar, Dr. Nola-Kate, 2005, The world urban forum 2006, Vancouver Working Group Discussion Paper, International Centre for Sustainable Cities.
55. Triangle J Council Of Government,2014, TJCOG Livability Self-Assessment for Municipalities Toolkit, PP. 1-38.
56. UPandey, Rama; Yogesh K. Garg and Alka Bharat, 2013, Understanding Qualitative Conceptions of Livability: Indian Perspective, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, eISSN: 2319-1163, pISSN: 2321-7308, PP. 374-380.
57. Van Kampb, Irene; Kess Leidelmeijer; Gooitske Marsmana and Augustinus de Hollander, 2003, Urban environmental quality and human well-being Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study, Landscape and Urban Planning, No. 65, PP.  5-18.
58. Victorian competition and efiiciency commission, 2008, A state of Liveability: An in inguir in to enhancing victoria’s Liveability, final report, Public Transport Users Association Inc, PP. 1-45.
59. Wang, Xiaozhan, 2010, The research on the evaluation index system of livable of rural areas in China - by the case of rural areas in Henan Province, Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, No. 1, PP. 456-461.
60. Wheeler, Stephen, 2001, Livable communities:creating safe and livable Neighborhoods, town and region in california, University of California at Berkeley, Institute of Urban and Regional Development.