Assessing the role of soundscape in the sense of belonging to the environment (case study: FARAHZAD neighborhood in Tehran)

Subject Areas : urban design

Mohammadreza Yazdanpanah shahabadi ¹ , hasan sajjadzadeh ² , Mehrdad Ahmadi ³ , Mehrdad Karimimoshaver ⁴

1 - Assistant Professor, Department of Urbanism, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Associate Professor of Bo Ali Sina School of Architecture and Urban Development
3 - Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Urbanism, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism.
4 - Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Bu-Ali SinaUniversity, Hamedan, Iran.

Received: 2022-06-12 Accepted : 2022-12-15 Published : 2022-12-22

Keywords: sense of belonging to the place, Farahzad neighborhood, Soundscape, qulity of environment,

Abstract :

Man recognizes and perceives the environment not only through the sense of sight but also through all his senses. Therefore, paying attention to non-physical dimensions in the environment can lead to the creation of spaces with higher environmental qu-ality and better sensory richness. One of the drivers of sense of belonging to the environment is the soundscape, which also affects the quality of urban space. The concept of soundscape refers to the profound effect of natural sounds and tunes on a person's sense of the environment and thus the effect on sensory richness and belonging to the environment. The main goal of this research is identify and evaluate the points of articulation and connection between the two concepts of soundscape and sense of belonging to the environment, in order to explain the intensity and relationship between these two variables in Farahzad neighborhood, that located on the northwest side in District 2 of Tehran, which is also one of the entertainment centers in Tehran. The statistical population of this study includes all residents and users of this site. This research is done on 385 people living or visiting this neighborhood through Sense Walking method. Pleasure is considered as the overall quality of the soundscape of the area from the people's point of view. In this method, people were asked to mark the sound index points in the map by holding a site map and focusing on the sense of hearing, and to determine its pleasant and unpleasant levels between 1 and 5. Accordingly, the number 1 indicates complete unpleasantness and the number 5 indicates the complete pleasantness of the soundscape and the numbers between them express the intermediate qualities. Then, we have considered the average level of pleasantness of different points expressed by people as the overall quality of the soundscape of the area from their point of view. A questionnaire was used to assess the sense of belonging to the area and Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analysis the correlation between the sense of belonging to the environment and the quality of the soundscape. The result of this study with respect to the correlation coefficient of 0.603 indicates a significant relationship between the quality of the soundscape and the degree of sense of spatial belonging in Farahzad neighborhood. On the other hand, the correlation between A-weighted equivalent continuous sound level (L_Aeq) in different spaces studied in Farahzad neighborhood and the average level of satisfaction announced by the respondents is equal to -0.739, which shows a significant and inverse relationship between sound intensity and the quality of the soundscape. The results of research show that the quality of the soundscape in three dimensions of environmental, individual and social is effective in the sense of belonging to the environment, So that the presence of natural elements in the environmental dimension, promoting mental health in the individual dimension and finally listening to the sounds and voices of neighborhood residents and acquaintances in the social dimension has an important effect on the sense of belonging to the environment.

References:

1. پاکزاد، جهانشاه. (1385). مبانی نظری و فرایند طراحی شهری. تهران: وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی، معاونت شهرسازی و معماری، دبیرخانه  شورای عالی معماری و شهرسازی.
2. پیربابایی، محمد تقی؛ و سجادزاده، حسن. (1390). تعلق جمعی به مکان, تحقق سکونت اجتماعی در محله سنتی. باغ نظر، 8(16)، 17-28.
3. جوان فروزنده، علی؛ و مطلبی، قاسم. (1390). مفهوم حس تعلق به مکان و عوامل تشکیل‌دهنده آن.  هویت شهر، 5(8)، 27-3. 
4. دانشپور، سید عبدالهادی؛ سپهری مقدم، منصور؛ و چرخچیان، مریم. (1388). تبیین مدل دلبستگی به مکان و بررسی عناصر و ابعاد مختلف آن. هنرهای زیبا، 1(38), 38-48. 
5. رلف، ادوارد (1389).  مکان و بی مکانی. (محمدرضا نقصان‌محمدی؛ کاظم مندگاری؛ و زهیر متکی، مترجمان). تهران: انتشارات آرمان شهر.( نشر اصلی اثر) 
6. زنگنه، یعقوب؛ حسین‌آبادی، سعید؛ روشندل، تکتم؛ و نبی پور، رضا. (1393). تأثیر تعلق مکانی و سرمایه اجتماعی بر بهسازی مشارکتی محلات قدیمی، نمونه موردی: محله سرده سبزوار. پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، 5(19)، 111-128. 
7. شبیری نژاد، مریم. (1388). مدیریت منظر صوتی شهر به کمک طراحی شهری، پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران.
8. غفاری، عباس؛ میر غلامی، مرتضی؛ و شفائی، بیتا. (1400الف). ادراک تباین صوتی در تجربه حرکت در فضاهای بازار تبریز. باغ نظر، 18(100)، 59-78. 
9. غفاری، عباس؛ میر غلامی، مرتضی؛ و شفائی، بیتا. (1400 ب). تبیین ارزیابی ذهنی مطلوبیت منظر صوتی بازار تبریز و اثرپذیری آن از تواتر و دلیل حضور افراد در بازار. هویت شهر, 15(3)، 59-72.  
10. فلاحت، محمدصادق. (1385). مفهوم حس مکان و عوامل آن. هنرهای زیبا، 1(26)، 57-66. 
11.کاشانی جو، خشایار. (1389). بازشناخت رویکرد نظری به فضاهای عمومی شهری. هویت شهر، 4(6)، 95-106. 
12.گلکار، کورش. (1380). مؤلفه‌های سازنده کیفیت طراحی شهری. صفه، 11(32)، 38-65. 
13.محسن حقیقی، نسرین؛ قلعه‌نویی،محمود؛ و غفاری، عباس. (1396). ارزیابی مؤلفه‌های مؤثر در نقش انگیزی و آسایش صوتی افراد در میدان نقش‌جهان اصفهان.  نامه معماری و شهرسازی، 10(19)، 133-152. 
14. نوربرگ شولتز، کریستین. (1382). معماری، معنا و مکان. (ویدا نوروز برازجانی، مترجم). تهران: جان جهان.( نشر اصلی اثر 1988).

15. Aletta, F., Kang, J., & Axelsson, O. (2016). Soundscape descriptors and a conceptual framework for developing predictive soundscape models. Landscape and Urban Planning, 149, 65–74. 
16. Alsina-Pagès, R., Ginovart-Panisello, G., Freixes, M. & Radicchi, A. (2021). A Soundwalk in the heart of Poblenou superblock in Barcelona: Preliminary study of the acoustic events. Noise Mapping, 8(1), 207-216. 
17. Axelsson, Ö., Nilsson, M. E., & Berglund, B. (2010). A principal components model of soundscape perception. Acous tical Society of America, 128(5), 2836-2846. 
18. Brown, A. (2010). Soundscapes and environmental noise management. Noise Control Engineering, 58(5), 493-500. 
19. Cain, R., Jennings, P., & Poxon, J. (2013). The development and application of the emotional dimensions of a soundscape. Applied Acoustics, 74(2), 232-239. 
20. Carmona, M. (Ed.). (2003). Public places, urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. London: Routledge.
21. Davies, W. J., Adams, M. D., Bruce, N. S., Cain, R., Carlyle, A., Cusack, P., & Jennings, P. (2013). Perception of soundscapes: An interdisciplinary approach. Applied 
Acoustics, 74(2), 224-231. 
22. Elmqvist, T. (2013) Designing the Urban Soundscape. Retrieved August 25, 2013, from https://www.thenatureofcities.com/2013/08/25/designing-the-urban-soundscape/ 
23. Farina, Almo. (2014), Soundscape Echology, principle, Patterns, Methods and Applications, (Frist Eddition), New York: Springer.
24. Frisby ،K. (1994) The flaˆneur in Social Theory. in: K. TESTER (Ed.) the Flaˆneur, London: Routledge.
25. Gifford, R., Donald, W. H., Muller-Clemm W., & Kelly, T. SH. (2002). Why Architects and Laypersons Judge Buildings Differently:Cognitive Properties and Physical Properties and Physical Bases. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research,19(2), 131-148. 
26. Goldsmith, M. (2015). Sound, a very short introduction. London: Oxford University press.
27. Guastavino, C., Katz, B. F. G., Polack, J. D., Levitin, D. J., & Dubois, D. (2004). Ecological validity of soundscape reproduction. Acustica united with Acta Acustica, 91(2), 333–341. 
28. Hiramatsu, K., Minoura, K., & Kinjo, I. (1999). A method for comparing sonic environments. In INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings. March 19, (1305-1308). Spain, Institute of Noise Control Engineering.
29. Htouris, S. (2001). A comparative interpretation of soundscape and noise. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Acoustics, Rome, Italy (pp. 10–11). Retrieved from. http://www.icacommission.org/proceedings/ica2001rome/6_14.pdf 
30. Jeon, J. Y., & Hong, J. Y. (2015). Classification of urban park soundscapes through perceptions of the acoustical environments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 141, 100-111. 
31. Jo, H. I., & Jeon, J. Y. (2021). Urban soundscape categorization based on individual recognition, perception, and assessment of sound environments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 216, 104241. 
32. Kang, J. (2006). Urban sound environment, Boca Raton: CRC Press.
33. Kang, J., & Schulte-Fortkamp, B. (2018). Soundscape and the built environment. Boca Rato: CRC Press.
34. Kihlman, T., Kropp, W., Öhrström, E., & Berglund, B. (2001), Soundscape support to health. A cross-disciplinary research program, In Proceedings of the International Congress and Exhibition on Noise Control Engineering, Hague, The Netherlands. 
35. Kitchen, P., Williams, A. M., & Gallina, M. (2015). Sense of belonging to local community in small-to-medium sized Canadian urban areas: a comparison of immigrant and Canadian-born residents. BMC psychology, 3(1), 28, 1-17. 
36. Krause, B. (2012). The great animal orchestra: Finding the origions of musics in the world wild places, United States: Little, Brown.
37. Lewicka, M. (2011). Place attachment: how far have we come in the last 40 years?. Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 207–230. 
38. Liu, S., Zhang, F., & Wu, F. (2022). Contrasting migrants' sense of belonging to the city in selected peri-urban neighbourhoods in Beijing. Cities, 12(3), 103499.  
39. Morillas, J. B., Escobar, V. G., & Gozalo, G. R. (2013). Noise source analyses in the acous tical environment of the medieval centre of Cáceres (Spain). Applied Acoustics, 74(4), 526-534. 
40. Nilsson, M. (2007). Soundscape Quality in Urban Open Spaces. Institute of Environmental Medicine. Karolinska Institutet & Department of Psychology, Stockholm University SE-10691. Stockholm, Sweden.
41. Payne, S. R., Davies, W., & Adams, M. (2009). Research into Practical And Policy Applications of Soundscape Concepts and Techniques in Urban Area(NANR 200). London: HMSO.
42. Pijanowski, B. C., Villanueva-Rivera, L. J., Dumyahn, S.L., Farina, A., Krause, B.L., Napoleyano, B. M., Gage, S. H., & Pieretti, N. (2011). Soundscape Echology: the Science of sound in landscape. Bioscience, 61(3), 203-216. 
43. Ren, X., Kang, J., Zhu, P., & Wang, S. (2018). Effects of soundscape on rural landscape evaluations. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 70, 45-56. 
44. Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of environmental psychology, 30(1), 1-10. 
45. Schafer, R. M. (1977). The Soundscape; our sonic environment and the tunning of the world. Rochester: Inner Traditions/Bear.
46. Stammers, J., & Chesmore, D. (2008). Instrument for soundscape recognition, Idenfication and evaluation: Signal classification. Acoustical Society of America, 123(5), 105-109. 
47. Williams, D. R., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The Measurement of Place Attachment: Validity and Generalizability of a Psychometric Approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830-840.
48.  Yuki, M. R. (2000), Towards a Literary Theory of Acoustic Ecology: Soundscapes in Contemporary Environmental Literature. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno, US.