تحلیل فضایی شاخص‌های کالبدی مسکن با تاکید بر شهر عادل (مطالعه موردی: مناطق 22گانه کلان‌شهر تهران)

محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی و پژوهشی پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهری

نفیسه مرصوصی ¹ (دانشیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه پیام‌ نور، تهران، ایران)
اسماعیل علی اکبری ² (استاد گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه پیام‌ نور، تهران، ایران)
افشین سفاهن ³ (استادیار جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه پیام‌ نور، تهران، ایران)
وحید بوستان احمدی ⁴ (دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران)

تاریخ دریافت : 1399/01/11 تاریخ پذیرش : 1399/02/16 تاریخ انتشار : 1400/05/01

کلید واژه: مسکن, عدالت فضایی, کلان شهر تهران, شاخص های کالبدی, نابرابری و شکاف,

چکیده مقاله :

شاخص­های مسکن به‌عنوان شالوده اصلی یک برنامه جامع و ابزاری ضروری برای بیان ابعاد مختلف اقتصادی، اجتماعی، فرهنگی، زیست‌محیطی و کالبدی مسکن از جایگاه ویژه­ای در امر برنامه­ریزی مسکن برخوردارند. ازاین‌رو، شناخت وضعیت شاخص­های مسکن مناسب و تلاش در جهت تحقّق سکونتگاه مطلوب و کاهش نابرابری­ها، امر مهمی در بحث تحقق­پذیری شهر عادل و نهایتا توسعه پایدار شهری تلقی می­گردد. در این راستا، هدف پژوهش حاضر سنجش و تحلیل فضایی شاخص­های کالبدی مسکن درچارچوب شهر عادل است. روش پژوهش، توصیفی- تحلیلی و هدف آن کاربردی است. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل اطلاعات از مدل­های کمی آنتروپی شانون، تاپسیس (TOPSIS)، ضریب پراکندگی (C.V)، آمار خودهمبستگی فضایی موران و از نرم‌افزار Arc GIS استفاده ‌شده است. نتایج نشان داد که شهر تهران در توزیع یکسان و دسترسی به شاخص­های کالبدی مسکن، شهری عادل نیست. به‌طوری‌که الگوی توزیع فضایی شاخص­های مورد مطالعه در سطح مناطق 22 گانه به‌صورت خوشه‌ای می­باشد و توزیع شاخص­های مورد مطالعه به‌صورت خوشه‌ای به چند منطقه (مناطق شمالی) تهران از جمله مناطق 1، 3 و 2 اختصاص دارد که به ترتیب با کسب میزان امتیاز تاپسیس 855/0، 447/0 و 385/0 رتبه­های اول تا سوم به خود اختصاص داده­اند. از نظر جغرافیایی توزیع شاخص‌های کالبدی مسکن از مناطق شمالی به سمت جنوبی، شرقی و غربی سیر نزولی داشته است. با توجه به نتایج به دست آمده می­توان نتیجه­گیری کرد که افتراق و ناعدالتی فضایی در توزیع شاخص­های کالبدی مسکن در بین مناطق 22 گانه تهران وجود دارد و فضای غالب در مناطق، پهنه­های نامناسب (27/0 درصد) و بسیار نامناسب (32/0 درصد) است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Housing indicators, as the main foundation of a comprehensive program and an essential tool for expressing various economic, social, cultural, environmental and physical dimensions of housing, have a special place in housing planning. Therefore, recognizing the status of appropriate housing indicators and trying to achieve the desired housing and reduce inequalities is considered important in the discussion of sustainable urban development. In this regard, the aim of the present study is to measure and analyze the physical characteristics of housing in the metropolis of Tehran with the approach of spatial justice. The research method is descriptive-analytical and its purpose is practical. To analyze the data, quantitative models of Shannon's entropy, TOPSIS, C.V scattering coefficient, Moran spatial self-correlation statistics and Arc GIS software were used. Findings from the study show that there is inequality within the region in having physical housing characteristics among the metropolitan areas of Tehran, so that the spatial distribution pattern of physical housing characteristics in the 22 regions The city of Tehran is in the form of a cluster, and regions 1, 3, and 2, with a score of 0.855, 0.447, and 0.385, respectively, are ranked 22nd among the 22 regions in terms of physical housing characteristics. First to third. On the other hand, Zone 21 is in the last place with the lowest amount of TOPSIS 0.038. Statistically, about 0.4 percent of the regions are in a privileged position, 0.23 percent are in a semi-privileged position, and 0.73 percent are in an inefficient position. Based on the obtained results, it can be concluded that the inequality within the region and the gap between the regions of Tehran in terms of having physical housing characteristics.
Extended abstract
Introduction:
          Urbanization is a global phenomenon that is now being developed in the developing world as a fire in which the language is growing and expanding. Think of the city as a forest and urbanization as a fire. Now suppose the forest is set on fire and its flames are spreading instantaneously over the entire forest area and overwhelming it. In the meantime, short-term and temporary measures will not work. Towns and cities also follow this rule. As urbanization grows and expands day by day. The main reason for this trend is the increase in the population of cities, especially the dominant cities. Now this urbanization can be examined in different dimensions. One of these is "housing". As the urbanization speeds up, various problems arise in the housing sector. In the meantime, affordable housing is not only at the individual level, but also as a basic need that some people in the community do not have, or are exposed to, their housing crisis. Socio-economic and dissatisfaction resulting in popular protests, chaos, urban and political crises that affect the lives of all members of society. And it also challenges the legitimacy of governments. Meanwhile, analyzing whether or not people in a community have access to shelter and housing because of their basic human needs, disregard for housing and a lack of a systematic look at planning processes and policies for the housing system can lead to (multi-dimensional) inequality.
Methodology:
      The method used in this study is descriptive-analytical and in terms of targeting strategy is applied. Libraries and documents (statistical yearbooks and statistics center) have also been used for data collection. The studied geographical area of ​​Tehran metropolis and its 22 regions is based on the political divisions of 2016. In order to evaluate the urban areas of Tehran in terms of physical housing indices, 46 indices derived from general population and housing census results of 2016 were used. Shannon entropy techniques, TOPSIS multivariate decision making technique, dispersion coefficient (C.V) and spatial autocorrelation method (Moran's) in Arc Gis software were used for data analysis.
Results:
       Zones 1, 3 and 2 were ranked first to third in terms of physical fitness indices, respectively, with TOPSIS score of 0.855, 0.447, and 0.385, respectively. On the other hand, Area 21 is in the last place with the lowest TOPSIS 0.038. These results suggest that spatial inequality exists in some of the studied indices among the 22 regions of Tehran. Statistically, about 0.4% of the areas are in the favorable condition, 0.23% are in the semi-favorable situation and 0.73% are in the poor situation. Geographically it can be said that some of the physical indicators of housing are decreasing and decreasing from north to south, east and west of Tehran.
Conclusion:
       The results of the scattering coefficient (c.v) model also confirm the findings of the TOPSIS model, which shows a deep gap between the 22 metropolitan areas of Tehran in terms of physical housing indices. These results indicate the imbalance and inequality of metropolitan areas in Tehran in terms of reflection, reflection and outcome indicators, political economy, land value, housing planning system failures and direct relationship with economic and social situation in the studied community.
These results make attention to the issue of spatial equity in the optimal accessibility and proper accessibility of different urban housing services which should be commensurate with different factors such as population. This can help planners to strengthen disadvantaged areas, reduce inequalities, citizens' satisfaction with physical conditions, and ultimately local stability. Since Tehran metropolis is exposed to natural disasters (earthquakes), contaminated and mountainous climatic conditions and burnout and demolition of housing in these conditions is inevitable and premature, so in order to be more in harmony with sustainability approach, attention should be paid to modernization. Worn and damaged tissues are a must. It is important to note that the results of this research in Tehran can help urban planners and officials in prioritizing urban development plans and housing planning for housing intervention.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. 1.  Abdi Daneshpour, Z., and Shafiee, A. (2018). Analysis of Spatial Inequality in Tehran's Residential System; Investigating Housing Price Change from 1991 to 2016, Geography and Development, Vol 16, No. 52, pp. 267-292. (In Persian).


2. 2.  Ahmadi, K, Akbari, M., and Ahmadi Boustn, V. (2020). Futurism of Housing Demand in Housing Cooperatives in Iran (Case Study: Housing, Employment and Labor Housing in Sanandaj), Quarterly Journal of Future Cities, Vol 1, No 1, pp. 71-87. (In Persian).


3. 3.  Akbari, N., and Mehdi Zahedi, K. (2008). Application and Methods of Multi-Index Ranking and Decision Making, Ministry of Interior, Publications of Municipalities and Departments of Iran. (In Persian).


4. 4.  Ali Akbari, E., and Akbari, M. (2019). Urban Development of Knowledge-Based Formulation of Strategic Plan of Tehran Metropolis. Geographical Researches of Urban Planning, Vol 7, No. 1, pp. 170-151. (In Persian).


5. 5.  Azizi, M. M. (2004). The Place of Housing Indicators in the Housing Planning Process, Journal of Fine Arts, No. 17. (In Persian).


6. 6.  Baker, E and Lester, L. (2017).  Multiple housing problems: A view through the housing niche lens. Cities Vol. 62, pp.146-151.


7. 7.  Chatterjee, R., Atta-ur-Rahman, Tran, T., and Shaw, R. (2016).Urban Food Security in Asia: A Growing Threat. Urban Disasters and Resilience in Asia, pp.161-178.


8. 8.  Choguill, C. L. (2007), The search for policies to support sustainable housing. Habitat International , Vol.31, No. 1, pp. 143 - 149


9. 9.  Davis, D. (1955).The Origin and Growth of Urbanization in the World," American Journal of Sociology Vol 60, No. 5, pp. 429-43.


10. 10.     Ghasemi Ghasemvand, E. (2015). Analysis and Evaluation of Urban Housing Status with a Sustainable Development Approach, Case Study: Saman City, Master's Thesis in Geography and Urban Planning, under the guidance of Issa Ebrahimzadeh, Sistan University and Balochistan Faculty of Geography and Environmental Planning, Zahedan. (In Persian).


11. 11.     Hall, P. G., and Pfeiffer, U. (2000). Urban Future 21: A Global Agenda for Twenty-first Century Cities: Routledge.


12. 12.     Hekmatnia, H., and Ansari, G.(2012). Housing Planning in a City Based on Sustainable Development Approach, Journal of Human Geography Research, Vol. 44, No. 79, pp. 207-191.


13. 13.     Hekmatnia, H., and Ansari, J. (2012). Meybod Housing Planning with a Sustainable Development Approach, Human Geographical Research, Vol 44, No 1, pp. 207-191. (In Persian).


14. 14.     Iran Census Center, Census of Population and Housing, 2016. (In Persian).


15. 15.     King, P. (2016). Principles of Housing. Routledge.


16. 16.     Latifi, Gh, Sheikhi, M., and Issa Lou, Sh (2016). Investigation and analysis of urban housing indicators in order to determine the priorities of housing planning (Case study: 22 districts of Tehran), Quarterly Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Urban Planning, Vol 4, No 1, pp. 57-74.


17. 17.     Lia, B., and Yao, R. (2009). Urbanisation and its impact on building energy consumption and efficiency in China. Renewable Energy, Vol 34, No. 39,  pp. 1994-1998.


18. 18.     Lotfi, p., and Khairkhah, Z (2012). Quantitative and qualitative study and forecasting of required housing (Case study of Sari Ofogh 1400 city), Journal of Geography and Urban Planning, Zagros Perspective, Vol 4, No 12, pp. 41-58. (In Persian).


19. 19.     Mathur, O.P. (2013). Urban poverty in Asia Asian Development Bank, Manila.https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/project-document/81002/urban-poverty-asia.pdf.


20. 20.     Meshkini, A., and Zargham Fard, M. (2018). Urban Housing Planning with a Look at Iran. Side Publications. (In Persian).


21. 21.     Mirktoli, J, Bad Dast, B, and Arian Kia, M. (2016). Assessing the sustainability status of physical housing indicators in order to promote the development of urban settlements (Case study: Gorgan city), Journal of Urban Social Geography, Vol 3, No 4, 125-146. (In Persian).


22. 22.     Mori, K., and Christodoulou, A. (2012). Review of sustainability indices and indicators: towards a new City Sustainability Index (CSI), Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., Vol 32, pp. 94-106.


23. 23.     Mori, K., and Yamashita, T. (2015). Methodological framework of sustainability assessment in City Sustainability Index (CSI): A concept of constraint and maximization indicators. Habitat International, Vol 45, No 1, PP. 10-14.


24. 24.     Nasution, Irma N., and Alvan, Syahreza (2017) Optimization of Sustainable House in Urban Area, Procedia Engineering, Vol 171, pp. 250-257.


25. 25.     Nejati, p., Alavi, S. A., and Qaed Rahmati, p. (1397). Analysis of urban housing poverty from a social dimension (Case study: Neighborhoods of District 17 of Tehran), Journal of Urban Social Geography, Vol 5, No 2,  87-106. (In Persian).


26. 26.     Pourmohammadi, M. R., Naimi, K., and Darvishi, F. (2016). Analysis of Housing Quality in Twenty Neighborhoods of Bijar by Entropy and SAW Method, Geography and Urban-Regional Planning, Vol. 6, No. 19, pp. 122-107. (In Persian).


27. 27.     Qadermarzi, H., Jemini, D., Jamshidi, AS., and Cheraghi, R (2013). Analysis of inequality of housing indicators in rural areas of Kermanshah province, Quarterly Journal of Space Economics and Rural Development, Vol 2, No 1, pp. 92-113. (In Persian).


28. 28.     Ravi, M. (1996). Evaluating My Policies in Relation to My Model Based on Urban Development Skills, The Third Working Paper on My Policies in Iran, First Edition, Fall, University of Tehran, pp. 77-63. (In Persian).


29. 29.     Reyes, A. (2018). Housing access and governance: The influence and evolution of housing organizations in Mexico City. Cities, Vol 74, pp. 327-333.


30. 30.     Rezaeirad, H., Rafieian, M., and Bamanian, M. R. (2011). Measuring the Effect of Quantitative and Qualitative Effects on Housing Price with Hedanik Model (Case Study: Narmak Neighborhood), Quarterly Journal of Urban Management Studies, Vol 3, No 8,  pp. 68-59. (In Persian).


31. 31.      Tuohy, P. G. (2007). Sustainable Housing, master thesis.


32. 32.     Uddin, N. (2018). Assessing urban sustainability of slum settlements in Bangladesh: Evidence from Chittagong city. Journal of Urban Management, Vol 7, No. 1, pp. 32-42.


33. 33.     Wallbaum, W., Ostermeyer, Y., Salzer, C., and Escamilla, E.Z. (2012). Indicator based sustainability assessment tool for affordable housing construction technologies. Ecological Indicators, Vol 18, pp. 353-364.


34. 34.     World Bank. (2006). Thirty Years of Worldbank Shelter Lending, World Bank. J. Kalarickal, R.M. Buckley (Eds), Washington, DC.


35. 35.     Zarabi, A., and Mahmoudzadeh, M. (2015):.An Analysis of the Housing Situation in Isfahan Province Using Factor Analysis and Vikor, Quarterly Journal of Spatial Planning (Geography), Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 49-62. (In Persian).


36. 36.     Zargham Fard, M. (2016). Evaluating Housing Policies from the Target Group's Needs. Master thesis. University of Tehran. (In Persian).


37. 37.     Ziyari, K., and Dehghan, M. (2003). Investigating the housing situation and its planning in Yazd city, Safa Magazine, Vol 13, No 36,  pp. 62-75. (In Persian).


38. 38.     Ziyari, K., and Ghasemi Ghasemvand, E. (2015). Evaluation of Quantitative and Qualitative Indicators of Housing with a Sustainable Development Approach (Case Study of Saman City), Journal of Geographical Research in Urban Planning, No. 2, No. 2, pp. 197-221.