Assessing and Evaluating the Resilience of the Pphysical-Spatial Structure of Urban Neighborhoods Against Earthquakes(Case Study: Minoodar Neighborhood of Qazvin)

Subject Areas : Urban Management Studies

Haleh Sadat Nabavi Razavi ¹ ( PhD Candidate, Department of urban planning, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran. [e-mail] )
Manoocher Tabibian ² ( Department of urban planning, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran. )

Received: 2021-07-13 Accepted : 2021-09-13 Published : 2021-08-23

Keywords: resilience, Physical-spatial structure, vulnerability, Form, activity, Minodar neighborhood,

Abstract :

Introduction & Objective: A resilient city is a network of sustainable social, economic, cultural, political, psychological, and physical systems. The purpose of this study is to measure and evaluate the resilience of the physical spatial structure of the Minodar neighborhood against earthquake, and the research method is descriptive-analytical.Research method: To measure the vulnerability of the Minodar neighborhood in terms of physical-spatial structure, the distribution of 15 questionnaires among urban and earthquake experts and the creation of information layers in GIS software have been used. To measure the resilience of the physical-spatial structure of Minodar neighborhood to reduce vulnerability to earthquakes, in addition to obtaining expert opinions, 320 questionnaires completed by residents have been cited. A regression test was used to analyze the research questions.Findings: The results of this analysis indicate that in terms of form criteria, 23% of neighborhoods have a high vulnerability, 59% moderate vulnerability, and 18% of neighborhoods have a low vulnerability to earthquakes. In addition, in terms of activity benchmarks, 6% of the neighborhood area is highly vulnerable, 11% is moderately vulnerable and 83% of the neighborhood is slightly vulnerable to earthquakes. To measure the resilience of the physical-spatial structure of Minodar neighborhood to reduce vulnerability to earthquakes, in addition to obtaining expert opinions, 320 questionnaires completed by residents have been cited. A regression test was used to analyze the research questions.The findings of this study show that there is an indirect relationship between the components of resilience and vulnerability to earthquakes.Conclusion: The results of this study show that there is an indirect relationship between the components of resilience and vulnerability. This relationship can be analyzed in such a way that in places where communication, reproducibility, flexibility, diversity, strength, and modulation are more in the physical-spatial structure of Minodar neighborhood, earthquake vulnerability decreases. Also, the variables "relevance", "reproducibility" and "flexibility" have a greater share in predicting the earthquake vulnerability variable. 

References:

بذرگر، محمد رضا. (1382) . شهرسازی و ساخت اصلی شهر، انتشارات کوشا مهر، شیراز.

جلالی، تارا. (1391). بازسازی تاب آور پس از زلزله 1382 بم از دیدگاه طراحی شهری، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد بازسازی پس از سانحه، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.

حسینیون، سولماز. (1385). راهنما طراحی شهری مقاوم در برابر زلزله، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد طراحی شهری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.

حمیدی، ملیحه؛ و حبیبی، سید محسن. (1376). استخوانبدی شهر تهران. تهران: سازمان مشاور فنی و مهندسی شهر تهران.

حمیدی، ملیحه. (1372). ارزیابی فرم شهری رودبار  زلزله 1369،ارائه ایده های کلی طراحی شهری برای کاهش آسیب و افزایش کار آیی شهر، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد شهرسازی، کتابخانه پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشکده شهرسازی دانشگاه تهران.

رضایی، محمد رضا. (1389). تبیین تاب آوری اجتماعات شهری به منظور کاهش اثرات سوانح طبیعی(زلزله)؛ مطالعة موردی: کلانشهر تهران، رساله دکتری، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

 کلانتری خلیل. (1395). پردازش و تحلیل داده ها با نرم افزار spss،انتشارات فرهنگ صبا، تهران، ایران

نهاوندی، آیناز. (1389). فرم شهر مقاوم در بازسازی پس از زلزله، نمونه موردی بم، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد بازسازی پس از سانحه، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.

Adger, W.N. (2003). ‘Building  Resilience to Promote sustainability: An Agenda for Coping with Globalization and Promoting Justice’. IHDP Update, 2 , PP. 1-3.

Allan, P., & Bryant,  M. (2014).  ‘The attributes of resilience : a tool in evaluation and design of earthquake and design of earthquake- prone cities’. International Journal of disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 5(2), PP. 109-129.

Allan, P., & Bryant, M (2013). ‘Open Spaces Innovation in Earthquack Affected Cities’. INTECH, chapter 9. PP. 183-204.

Allan, P., & Bryant, M. (2010). ‘The critical role of open space in Earthquake Recovery’. NZSEE Conference, 34, PP. 1-10.

Bahrainy, H. (2003). ‘Natural Disaster Managment in Iran during the 1990s-need for a New structure’. Jurnal of Urban planning & Development, 129(3), PP. 1-23.

Bruneau, M., , Chang, S. E., Eguchi, R. T., Lee, G. C., O'Rourke, T. D., Reinhorn, A. M., & et al. (2003). ‘A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities’. Earthquake Spectra, 19(4), PP. 733–752.

Cutter, Susan L., Lindsey Barnes, Melissa Berry, Christopher Burton, Elijah Evans, Eric Tate, and Jennifer Webb. (2008). ‘A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters’. Global Environmental Change: forthcoming.pp. ) 598–606.

Davis I., Izadkhah, Y. (2006). ‘Building Resilient Urban Communities.

‘Definition of Community Resilience: An Analysis, A CARRI Report, Community & regional Resilience Institue’ (2013).

Desouza, K. C., & Flanery, T. H. (2013). ‘Designing, planning, and managing resilient cities: A conceptual framework’. Cities, 35, PP. 89–99.

Godschalk, D. R. (2003). ‘Urban Hazard Mitigation: Creating Resilient cities’. Natural Hazard Review, 4(3), PP. 136-143.

Holling, C. S. (1973). ‘Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems’. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4(1), 1–23.

Holling, C. S. (1986). ‘The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and global change’. In: clark , W.C. , Munn, R.E. (Eds), sustainable Development of Biosphere. Lodon: Cambridge University Press. PP .292-320.

Klein, R. J., Nicholls, R. J. & Thomalla, F. (2003). ‘Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this Concept?’ Environmental Hazards, 5(1), PP. 35-45.

Chang, D (2018). ‘Knowledge-Based, Smart and Sustainable Cities : A Provocation for a Conceptual Framework, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity

Cristina, A, Javier, F and Anelise, D (2014). ‘Expert Systems with Applications Capital System, Creative Economy and Knowledge City Transformation : Insights from Bento Gonçalves, Brazil’. Expert Systems with Applications (12)41:5614-2441

Ergazakis, K, Metaxiotis,K and Psarras, J (2006). ‘Knowledge Cities: The Answer to the Needs of Knowledge-Based Development’. Vine (1)36:67-84.

Esmaeilpoorarabi, N, Yigitcanlar, T and Guaralda, M (2018). Land Use Policy Evaluating Place Quality in Innovation Districts