ارزیابی کاربری‌های زمین با توجه به دسترسی حمل و نقلی (مطالعه موردی: منطقه 6 تهران)
محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی و پژوهشی پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهری
محمد آزموده
1
(دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد/ دانشگاه صنعتی نوشیروانی بابل)
فرشیدرضا حقیقی
2
(عضو هیات علمی)
کلید واژه: GIS, تحلیل فضایی, دسترسی, توزیع تسهیلات شهری, ارزشیابی چند معیاره,
چکیده مقاله :
مفهوم "دسترسی" مشخصه‌ای مهم در فضاهای شهری بوده و رابطی حیاتی میان حمل و نقل و کاربری زمین است که در رشته های مختلف به خصوص برنامه ریزی حمل و نقل و برنامه ریزی شهری نقش مهمی را در سیاست های اتخاذ شده توسط تصمیم گیران ایفا می‌کند. بنابراین، در مطالعه پیش رو با اندازه‌گیری دسترسی به مراکز شهری و تسهیلات حمل و نقلی و با تکیه بر بررسی مطالعات گذشته، مجموعه مناسبی از پارامترهای مرتبط با دسترسی جمع‌آوری شده و با استفاده از سیستم اطلاعات جغرافیایی(GIS) و بهره‌گیری از روش‌های تصمیم‌گیری چند معیاره برای وزن دهی به پارامترها، ارزش بلوک‌های منطقه بر اساس پارامترهای دسترسی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفته شد. این مطالعه نشان می‌دهد دسترسی به ایستگاه‌های حمل و نقل عمومی بر ارزش نهایی هر بلوک تأثیر قابل توجهی دارد، بطوریکه حدود 94% بلوک‌های با دسترسی مناسب به ایستگاه‌ها، از حیث ارزش دسترسی نهایی نیز نسبت به بلوک های دیگر مسکونی منطقه دارای رتبه بالاتری هستند. در نهایت، با گردآوری نتایج حاصل از بررسی تمامی پارامترها مشخص شد 60% بلوک‌ها ارزشی بالاتر از میانگین منطقه و 40% پایین تر از حد میانگین در دسترسی به تسهیلات منطقه‌ای قرار دارند. همینطور مشخص شد از بین پارامترهای بررسی شده مؤثر در دسترسی، پارامتر "فاصله از حمل و نقل عمومی" بیشترین تأثیر را در ارزیابی میزان دسترسی مناطق دارد. به این طریق، این مطالعه می‌تواند به برنامه‌ریزان شهری به منظور تصمیم‌گیری مناسب در رابطه با توزیع مناسب خدمات شهری و تسهیلات حمل و نقلی در سطح منطقه یاری برساند.
“Accessibility” is a substantial characteristic in urban areas and a vital connection between transportation and land-use which plays an important role in transportation and urban planning in policies made by decision-makers. Therefore, in recent years, according to urban growth and traffic problems, measuring accessibility to urban centers and transportation facilities has taken into consideration. In this paper, at first, a body of previous studies has been reviewed in order to collect a set of appropriate accessibility-based parameters. Then, by using geographical information system (GIS) and multi-criteria decision-making approaches for weighting to parameters, the value of residential blocks has been assessed. This study shows that access to transportation facilities has a significant effect on the final value of the blocks, such that by considering all parameters, about 94% of blocks with good access to public transportation stations have high value in the final evaluation; and “Distance from public transportation” is the most effective factor in the evaluation. Finally, it has been determined that with collecting the results of analyzing all parameters, 60% of blocks are above the zones’ average value and 40% are below. Thus, this study can help urban planners for decision making in order to appropriate distribution of urban services and transport facilities in the urban areas.
Apparicio, P., Abdelmajid, M., Riva, M., Shearmur, R., 2008. Comparing alternative approaches to measuring the geographical accessibility of urban health services: Distance types and aggregation-error issues. Int. J. Health Geogr. 7, 7. doi:10.1186/1476-072X-7-7
Banister, D., 2008. The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp. Policy 15, 73–80. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
Batty, M., 2009. Accessibility: in search of a unified theory. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 36, 191–194.
Coppola, P., Halden, D., 2014. Planning for the future of transport: challenges, methods, analysis and impacts - 41st European Transport Conference Selected ProceedingsShaping the Future: Case Studies in UK Accessibility Planning. Transp. Res. Procedia 1, 284–292. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2014.07.028
Coppola, P., Papa, E., 2013. Accessibility Planning Tools for Sustainable and Integrated Land Use/Transport (LUT) Development: An Application to Rome, in: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the Italian Society of Transportation Academics (SIDT 2012 Scientific Seminar).
Curtis, C., 2008. Planning for sustainable accessibility: The implementation challenge. Transp. Policy 15, 104–112. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.003
De Montis, A., Reggiani, A., 2013. Cities special section on “Analysis and Planning of Urban Settlements: The Role of Accessibility.” Cities 30, 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2012.08.001
Eastman, J.R., 1995. GIS and decision making. Unitar.
Geurs, K.T., VAn Wee, B., 2004. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J. Transp. Geogr. 12, 127–140.
Handy, S.L., Niemeier, D.A., 1997. Measuring accessibility: an exploration of issues and alternatives. Environ. Plan. A 29, 1175–1194.
Hansen, W.G., 1959. How accessibility shapes land use. J. Am. Inst. Plann. 25, 73–76.
Horner, M.W., 2013. Exploring the linkages between transportation, urban form, and energy. J. Transp. Geogr. 33, 207–209. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.09.009
Karou, S., Hull, A., 2014. Accessibility modelling: predicting the impact of planned transport infrastructure on accessibility patterns in Edinburgh, UK. J. Transp. Geogr. 35.
Knox, P., Pinch, S., 2014. Urban Social Geography: An Introduction. Routledge.
Kwan, M.-P., 1998. Space-Time and Integral Measures of Individual Accessibility: A Comparative Analysis Using a Point-based Framework. Geogr. Anal. 30, 191–216. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4632.1998.tb00396.x
Kwan, M.-P., Weber, J., 2003. Individual Accessibility Revisited: Implications for Geographical Analysis in the Twenty-first Century. Geogr. Anal. 35, 341–353. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4632.2003.tb01119.x
Litman, T., 2016. Evaluating accessibility for transportation planning. Vic. BC Vic. Transp. Policy Inst.
Lotfi, S., Koohsari, M.J., 2009. Measuring objective accessibility to neighborhood facilities in the city (A case study: Zone 6 in Tehran, Iran). Cities 26, 133–140. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2009.02.006
Malczewski, J., 2006. GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 20, 703–726.
MOUDON, A., Kavage, M.S.E., Mabry, M.J.E., Sohn, M.D., 2005. Land use and transportation: operationalizing the relationship with a transportationefficient land use mapping index, in: Transportation Research Board (TRB), 84th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
Páez, A., Scott, D.M., Morency, C., 2012. Measuring accessibility: positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. J. Transp. Geogr., Special Section on Accessibility and Socio-Economic Activities: Methodological and Empirical Aspects 25, 141–153. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.03.016
Pearce, J., Witten, K., Bartie, P., 2006. Neighbourhoods and health: a GIS approach to measuring community resource accessibility. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 60, 389–395. doi:10.1136/jech.2005.043281
Pirie, G.H., 1979. Measuring accessibility: a review and proposal. Environ. Plan. A 11, 299–312.
Saaty, T.L., 2003. Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 145, 85–91. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00227-8
Saaty, T.L., 1988. What is the Analytic Hierarchy Process?, in: Mitra, G., Greenberg, H.J., Lootsma, F.A., Rijkaert, M.J., Zimmermann, H.J. (Eds.), Mathematical Models for Decision Support, NATO ASI Series. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 109–121.
Straatemeier, T., 2008. How to plan for regional accessibility? Transp. Policy, New Developments in Urban Transportation Planning 15, 127–137. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.002
Talen, E., Anselin, L., 1998. Assessing Spatial Equity: An Evaluation of Measures of Accessibility to Public Playgrounds. Environ. Plan. A 30, 595–613. doi:10.1068/a300595
te Brömmelstroet, M., Bertolini, L., 2011. A transition towards sustainable strategy making: integrating land use and transport knowledge types, in: Transitions towards Sustainable Mobility. Springer, pp. 19–40.
Thériault, M., Des Rosiers, F.D. (Eds.), 2011. Modeling urban dynamics: mobility, accessibility and real estate value, Adapted and updated. ed, Geographical information systems series. ISTE Ltd, London.
van Wee, B., 2016. Accessible accessibility research challenges. J. Transp. Geogr. 51, 9–16. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.10.018
Vandenbulcke, G., Steenberghen, T., Thomas, I., 2009. Mapping accessibility in Belgium: a tool for land-use and transport planning? J. Transp. Geogr. 17, 39–53. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.04.008
Weibull, J.W., 1976. An axiomatic approach to the measurement of accessibility. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 6, 357–379. doi:10.1016/0166-0462(76)90031-4
Zarekani, M., Panna, M., Bouferguene, A., Al-Hussein, M., 2015. Measuring Quality of Life from the Perspective of Neighborhood Accessibility. Presented at the 2015 International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management.
_||_Apparicio, P., Abdelmajid, M., Riva, M., Shearmur, R., 2008. Comparing alternative approaches to measuring the geographical accessibility of urban health services: Distance types and aggregation-error issues. Int. J. Health Geogr. 7, 7. doi:10.1186/1476-072X-7-7
Banister, D., 2008. The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp. Policy 15, 73–80. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
Batty, M., 2009. Accessibility: in search of a unified theory. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 36, 191–194.
Coppola, P., Halden, D., 2014. Planning for the future of transport: challenges, methods, analysis and impacts - 41st European Transport Conference Selected ProceedingsShaping the Future: Case Studies in UK Accessibility Planning. Transp. Res. Procedia 1, 284–292. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2014.07.028
Coppola, P., Papa, E., 2013. Accessibility Planning Tools for Sustainable and Integrated Land Use/Transport (LUT) Development: An Application to Rome, in: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the Italian Society of Transportation Academics (SIDT 2012 Scientific Seminar).
Curtis, C., 2008. Planning for sustainable accessibility: The implementation challenge. Transp. Policy 15, 104–112. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.003
De Montis, A., Reggiani, A., 2013. Cities special section on “Analysis and Planning of Urban Settlements: The Role of Accessibility.” Cities 30, 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2012.08.001
Eastman, J.R., 1995. GIS and decision making. Unitar.
Geurs, K.T., VAn Wee, B., 2004. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J. Transp. Geogr. 12, 127–140.
Handy, S.L., Niemeier, D.A., 1997. Measuring accessibility: an exploration of issues and alternatives. Environ. Plan. A 29, 1175–1194.
Hansen, W.G., 1959. How accessibility shapes land use. J. Am. Inst. Plann. 25, 73–76.
Horner, M.W., 2013. Exploring the linkages between transportation, urban form, and energy. J. Transp. Geogr. 33, 207–209. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.09.009
Karou, S., Hull, A., 2014. Accessibility modelling: predicting the impact of planned transport infrastructure on accessibility patterns in Edinburgh, UK. J. Transp. Geogr. 35.
Knox, P., Pinch, S., 2014. Urban Social Geography: An Introduction. Routledge.
Kwan, M.-P., 1998. Space-Time and Integral Measures of Individual Accessibility: A Comparative Analysis Using a Point-based Framework. Geogr. Anal. 30, 191–216. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4632.1998.tb00396.x
Kwan, M.-P., Weber, J., 2003. Individual Accessibility Revisited: Implications for Geographical Analysis in the Twenty-first Century. Geogr. Anal. 35, 341–353. doi:10.1111/j.1538-4632.2003.tb01119.x
Litman, T., 2016. Evaluating accessibility for transportation planning. Vic. BC Vic. Transp. Policy Inst.
Lotfi, S., Koohsari, M.J., 2009. Measuring objective accessibility to neighborhood facilities in the city (A case study: Zone 6 in Tehran, Iran). Cities 26, 133–140. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2009.02.006
Malczewski, J., 2006. GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 20, 703–726.
MOUDON, A., Kavage, M.S.E., Mabry, M.J.E., Sohn, M.D., 2005. Land use and transportation: operationalizing the relationship with a transportationefficient land use mapping index, in: Transportation Research Board (TRB), 84th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
Páez, A., Scott, D.M., Morency, C., 2012. Measuring accessibility: positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. J. Transp. Geogr., Special Section on Accessibility and Socio-Economic Activities: Methodological and Empirical Aspects 25, 141–153. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.03.016
Pearce, J., Witten, K., Bartie, P., 2006. Neighbourhoods and health: a GIS approach to measuring community resource accessibility. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 60, 389–395. doi:10.1136/jech.2005.043281
Pirie, G.H., 1979. Measuring accessibility: a review and proposal. Environ. Plan. A 11, 299–312.
Saaty, T.L., 2003. Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 145, 85–91. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00227-8
Saaty, T.L., 1988. What is the Analytic Hierarchy Process?, in: Mitra, G., Greenberg, H.J., Lootsma, F.A., Rijkaert, M.J., Zimmermann, H.J. (Eds.), Mathematical Models for Decision Support, NATO ASI Series. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 109–121.
Straatemeier, T., 2008. How to plan for regional accessibility? Transp. Policy, New Developments in Urban Transportation Planning 15, 127–137. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.002
Talen, E., Anselin, L., 1998. Assessing Spatial Equity: An Evaluation of Measures of Accessibility to Public Playgrounds. Environ. Plan. A 30, 595–613. doi:10.1068/a300595
te Brömmelstroet, M., Bertolini, L., 2011. A transition towards sustainable strategy making: integrating land use and transport knowledge types, in: Transitions towards Sustainable Mobility. Springer, pp. 19–40.
Thériault, M., Des Rosiers, F.D. (Eds.), 2011. Modeling urban dynamics: mobility, accessibility and real estate value, Adapted and updated. ed, Geographical information systems series. ISTE Ltd, London.
van Wee, B., 2016. Accessible accessibility research challenges. J. Transp. Geogr. 51, 9–16. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.10.018
Vandenbulcke, G., Steenberghen, T., Thomas, I., 2009. Mapping accessibility in Belgium: a tool for land-use and transport planning? J. Transp. Geogr. 17, 39–53. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.04.008
Weibull, J.W., 1976. An axiomatic approach to the measurement of accessibility. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 6, 357–379. doi:10.1016/0166-0462(76)90031-4
Zarekani, M., Panna, M., Bouferguene, A., Al-Hussein, M., 2015. Measuring Quality of Life from the Perspective of Neighborhood Accessibility. Presented at the 2015 International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management.