Sustainable Development of Geographical Environment

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

Measurement of Dimensions and Indices of Livability in NourAbad Delfan City

    Authors

    1 Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Iran

    2 Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, Islamic Azad Universiti, Science and Research Branch Tehran, Iran

,

Document Type : Original article

Abstract

Generally, Sustainable development focused on the balance of economic and social environmental goals  and it will bring a very prosperous outlook in the future.livability refers to a set of sustainability subjects which directly influenced on Community members. Therefore, livability is a way to sustainable development. In this regard, purpose of the present study is to investigate the rate of livability in the NourAbad Delphan city for it leads to sustainable development. The method of this research is descriptive and analytical, using a questionnaire and direct observation tool. Therefore, a combination of quantitative and qualitative method is used. The statistical population of this study was all citizens of NourAbad city, which totaled 66417 in the year 1395. To estimate the sample size, a Cochran formula was used that number. The sample was 384 according to this formula. After determining the sample size, the questionnaires were distributed randomly among the citizens. In addition, the researcher in person has directly observed the indicators studied at the city level. The obtained data were analyzed using SPSS and T single-sample tests, Friedman test The results of this study showed that the dimensions of Livability in Nourabad city were not coordinated and not equal, and then the environment with a total of 3 favorable and average indicators was 2.55 times higher than that of the city and more consistent with the criteria of the city of Livability. Subsequent to the total of 6 indicators, 2 indicators of education , Social solidarity and social status, and the four indicators of the amount of leisure time services, health services, social security, social participation, and unfavorable status. The average score of the social dimension was 1.90. The last stage of the economic adventure was characterized by four indicators, which indicate that the housing and consumer goods in the optimal situation, the transport indicator, and the infrastructure are also relatively favorable and the employment index is in an extremely unfavorable situation. The undesirable index of employment in the city has not only greatly reduced the Livability, which has caused permanent and seasonal migrations and especially young people in the city of NourAbad. Thus, the dimensions of the habitability in the city of NuorAbad are associated with severity and weakness, and the greater the extent of the environment to the Moving social and economic dimensions reduces the severity of Livability.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
  1. -بندر آباد. ع.، 1390. شهر زیست پذیر از مبانی تا معنا، انتشارات آذرخش، چاپ اول، 31 ص.
  2. -حاتمی نژاد، ح.، رضوانی، م.ر. و کردستانی، ف.، 1393. سنجش میزان زیست پذیری منطقه دو شهر سنندج، نشریه تحلیل فضایی مخاطرات محیطی، 43 ص.
  3. -خراسانی، م.ا.، رضوانی، م.ر.، مطیعی لنگرودی، س.ح. و رفیعیان، م.، 1391. سنجش و ارزیابی زیست پذیری روستاهای پیرامون شهری مطالعه موردی: شهرستان و رامین، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های روستایی، سال سوم، شماره 4، صص 79-104.
  4. -خراسانی، م.ا، 1391. تبیین زیست پذیری روستاهای پیرامون شهری با رویکرد کیفیت زندگی مطالعه موردی شهرستان ورامین، رساله دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران.
  5. -ساسان پور، ف.، تولایی، س. و جعفری اسدآبادی، ح.، 1393. قابلیت زیست پذیری شهرها در راستای توسعه پایدار شهری مطالعه موردی: کلان‌شهر تهران، فصلنامه علمی- پژوهشی و بین‌المللی انجمن جغرافیای ایران، دوره جدید، سال دوازدهم، شماره 42، صص 129-157.
  6. -ساسان پور، ف.، تولایی، س. و 1394. سنجش و ارزیابی زیست پذیری شهری در مناطق بیست ‌و دو گا نه کلان‌شهر تهران، فصلنامه برنامه‌ریزی منطقه‌ای، دوره 5، سال پنجم، شماره 18، صص27-42.
  7. -شماعی، ع. و بیگدلی، ل.، 1395. ابعاد زیست پذیری در منطقه 17 تهران، فصلنامه علمی- پژوهشی و بین المللی انجمن جغرافیای ایران، دوره جدید، سال چهاردهم، شماره 50، صص 171-191.
  8. -صرافی، م.، توکلی نیا، ج. و محمدیان مصمم، ح.، 1393. اندیشه‌های نو در برنامه ریزی شهری، تهران، قدیانی، 72 ص.
  9. -ضرابی، ا. و موسوی، م.ن.، 1388. بررسی و کارکرد شهرهای کوچک در توسعه منطقه‌ای مطالعه موردی: استان یزد، مجله جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی محیطی، دوره20، شماره 2، صص 10-12.
  10. -قنبری، م.، شکوهی، م.ا.، رهنما، م.ر. و خوارزمی، ا.ع.، 1395. تحلیلی بر زیست پذیری شهری با تاکید بر شاخص امنیت و پایداری مورد مطالعه: کلانشهر مشهد، فصلنامه پژوهشی جغرافیای سیاسی، سال اول، شماره 3، ص 132-133.
  11.  
  12.  
  13. -Allen, T.F.H., 2010. “Making Livable Sustainable Systems Unremarkable.” Systems Research and Behavioral Science, v. 27 (5), p. 79-469.
  14. -Baum, S., Arthurson, K. and Rickson, K., 2010. Happy people inmixed-up places: The associationbetween the degree and type of local socioeconomic mix and expressions ofneighbourhood satisfaction. Urban Studies, v. 47(3), p. 467–485. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098009351941.
  15. -Burton, M., 2014. Quality of place, In Encyclopedia of quality of life and Well-Being research (p. 5312–5314): Springer.
  16. -Cown (Cowan), R., 2005. “the dictionary of urbanism”, street wise press.
  17. -De Jong, M. and et al., 2015. Sustainable–smart–resilient–low carbon–eco–knowledge cities; making sense of a multitude of concepts promoting sustainable urbanization, Journal of Cleaner production, v. 109, p. 25-38.
  18. -Holden, M., 2012. “Is Integrated Planning Any More Than the Sum of Its Parts?: Considerations for Planning Sustainable Cities.” Journal of Planning Education and Research, v. 32(3): p. 305–18.
  19. -Heylen, K., 2006. Liveability in social housing: three case studies in Flanders.
  20. -Insch, A. and Florek, M., 2010. Place satisfaction of city residents: Findings and implicationsfor city branding. In G. Ashworth, & M. Kavaratzis (Eds.), Towards effectiveplace brand management: Branding European Cities and Regions (PP. 191–204). Cheltenham: Edward Edgar Publishing Limited.
  21. -Midgley, J. And Livermore, M., 1998. “Social Capital and Local Economic Development: Implications for Community Social Work Practice,” Journal of Community Practice, v. 5(1/2): p. 29-40.
  22. -Ley, D. 1990. Urban liveability in context, Urban Geography, v. 11(1), p. 31-35.
  23. -Ley, A. and Newton, P. 2010. ‘Creating and sustaining liveable cities’, in Kallidaikurichi, S. andYuen, B. (Eds.): Developing Living Cities: From Analysis to Action, World Scientific, Singapore.
  24. -Litman, T., 2011. Sustainability and Livability: Summary of Definitions, Goals, Objectives and Performance Indicators, Victoria, Canada: Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
  25. -Lowe, M., Whitzman, C., Badland, H., Davern, M., Hes, D., Aye, L., Butterworth, I. and Giles-Corti, B., 2013. Liveable, healthy, sustainable: What are the keyindicatorsfor Melbourne neighbourhoods?The conceptual meaning of livability and its importance to planning today: A case studyof the regeneration of Cardiff Bay, 2014 Author: Spencer Powell (130126436).
  26. -Mastura, A., Norafida Ab, Gh., Abubakar, A. and Keumala, N., 2017. A Systematic Review on City Liveability Global Research in the Built Environment: Publication and Citation Matrix, Journal of Design and Built Environment, Special Issue.
  27. -McCrea, R., Stimson, R. and Western, J., 2005. Testing a moderated model of satisfactionwith urban living using data for Brisbane-South East Queensland, Australia, SocialIndicators Research, v. 72(2), p. 121–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-2211-
  28. -Mercer QualityofLivingSurvey. ⟨www.mercer.com.⟩.
  29. -McCrea, R. and Walters, P., 2012. Impacts of urban consolidation on urban liveability: Comparing an inner and outer suburb in Brisbane, Australia, Housing, Theory andSociety, v. 29(2), p. 190-206.
  30. -Mohamad, K., 2016. Urban livability across disciplinary and professional boundaries, Frontiers of Architectural Research.
  31. -Omuta, G.E., 1988. The quality of urban life and the perception of livability: A casestudy of neighbourhoods in Benin City, Nigeria, Social Indicators Research, v. 20(4), p. 17-440.
  32. -Steuteville, R., 2016. “What is a livable Community, Anyway?,” Pubic Square, Congress for New Urbanism (www.cnu.org); at www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2016/10/25/what-livable-communityanyway.
  33. -Rue, H., Rooney, K., Dock, S., Ange, K., Twaddell, H. and Poncy, A., 2011. The role of FHWA programs in livability, Retrieved from.
  34. -Shaheen, S. and et al. 2016. Moving Toward a Sustainable California: Exploring Livability, Accessibility & Prosperity, UC Berkeley Transportation Sustainability Research Center (http://innovativemobility.org) for the California Department of Transportation.
  35. -Tan Khee Giap, 2014. A new approach to measuring the liveability of cities:the Global Liveable Cities Index, World Review of Science, Technology and Sust, Development, v. 11(2).
  36. -Türksever, A.N.E. and Atalik, G., 2001. Possibilities and limitations for the measurementof the quality of life in urban areas. Social Indicators Research, v. 53(2), p. 163–187.
  37. -Veenhoven, R. and Ehrhardt, J., 1995. The cross-national pattern of happiness: Test of predictions implied inthree theories of happiness, Social Indicators Research, v. 34, p. 33–68.
  38. -Vuchic, V., 1999. Transportation for Livable Cities, Center for Urban Policy Research, New Jersey.
  39. -Visser, P., Dam, V.F. and Hooimeijer, P., 2005. The influence of neighbourhoodcharacteristics on geographical differences in house prices in the Netherlands, In European Network for Housing Research (ENHR) International HousingConference, v. 29, p. 149-169.
  40. -UN-ESA (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division) 2014. World urbanization prospects [highlights], The 2014 revision. (ST/ESA/SER.A/352).
  41. -United Nations, 2014. World Urbanization Prospects, REVISION, 2014.
  42. -UNEP, 2013. City-level decoupling, Urban resource fl ows and the governance of infrastructuretransitions, A report of the Working Group on Cities of the International Resource Panel, UNEP, Nairobi.
  43. -West, S. and Badham, M., 2008. A strategic framework for creating livable new communities: Final report, Victorian Growth Areas Authority: Melbourne, Victoria.
  44. -Woolcock, G., 2009. Measuring up? assessing the liveability of Australian cities. In State of Australian Cities: National Conference, Perth, p. 1-19. PromacoConventions.
  45. -Young, E. and Hermanson, V., 2013. Livability literature review: synthesis of current practice. In Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting (No. 13-2940).Washington, DC, USA: National Association of Regional Councils.
  46. -Zhang, X.Q. 2016. The trends, promises and challenges of urbanisation in the world, Habitat International, v. 54, p. 241-252.
Sustainable Development of Geographical Environment
Volume 2, Issue 3 - Serial Number 3
January 2021
Pages 67-86
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics