توسعة مدل آنتروپی شانون-وینر بر مبنای پارادایمهای توسعة شهری مبتنی بر اختلاط کاربری زمین شهری
محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی و پژوهشی پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهریمریم قهرمانی 1 , محمدرضا پورجعفر 2 , نوید سعیدی رضوانی 3
1 - دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران
2 - استاد گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
3 - دانشیار گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران
کلید واژه: تنوع, مدل آنتروپی شانون- وینر, پارادایم‌هایِ توسعة شهری, کاربری زمین مختلط, مدل تنوع مکان (PDM),
چکیده مقاله :
اگرچه امروزه برتری و اهمیت رویکرد توسعة مختلط کاربریهای شهری در فرآیند شهرنشینی و برنامهریزی شهری، آشکار شده است؛ امّا این رویکرد، ضرورتاً یک رویکرد غالب نیست؛ بلکه ساختاری از شهر را تولید میکند که مدّ نظر پارادایمهای معاصرِ توسعة شهریِ مبتنی براختلاط کاربری زمین شهری نظیر نوشهرگرایی میباشد. برای پویایی این رویکرد جدید، نیاز به بازاندیشی در عوامل و عناصر شکلدهندة ساختار و فرم شهری است که مولّد تنوع باشند. شاخص «تنوع» زیرمجموعة «الگوی توزیع» بهعنوان یکی از اجزای مدل ارزیابی اختلاط کاربری زمین شهری است. شاخصهای مطرح شده در این مدل بهویژه «تنوع» بسیار پیچیدهاند؛ لذا جهت تبیین و شفافسازی این مفهوم به مطالعات بینرشتهای روی آورده و از مفاهیم «تنوع زیستی» وامگرفته و بر مبنای پارادایمهای توسعة شهری مبتنی بر اختلاط کاربری زمین شهری که بهطور مستقیم بر محیطزیست تأثیرگذار هستند، بسط داده شده است؛ علاوه بر شاخصهای استخراج شده ازنظریات، مدلها و روشهای ارزیابی «تنوع» بر اساس روش «تحلیل محتوی کیفی»، با استفاده از «روش دلفی» بر پایة نظرات خبرگان و متخصصین شاخصهای جدیدی استخراج وجهت ارزیابی و اولویتبندی نتایجِ استخراج شده از روشهای آماری، نمودار «نقاط پراکنده» با معیار «نقطة شکست»، «ضریب هماهنگی کندال» بهمنظور ارزیابی میزان اتفاقنظر اعضاء پنل و میزان اطمینان نسبت به شاخصهای اجماع شده و روش پردازش دادههای «تحلیل محتوی» استفاده و برآیند همه مفاهیم و شاخصهای مورد بررسی، باعنوان «مدل تنوع مکان (PDM)» تبیین شد. این مدل شامل 4 دسته و 12 شاخص میباشد که درواقع دسته «الف» با میانگین وزن دسته (310/0) بیشترین اهمیت و دسته «د» با میانگین وزن دسته (180/0) کمترین اهمیت را دارد.
Although, the significance of development of the Urban Mixed land use approach is specified in the urbanization and urban planning process but this approach is not necessarily a dominant approach but also it produces the structure of the city for the contemporary paradigms of urban planning such as New Urbanism and Smart Growth. The notable issue of urban mixed development is that this form of development is a form of Urban "Place Making". For the dynamics of this new approach, it is necessary to rethink the factors and elements that the structure and form of the city that generates diversity. Diversity Index is a subset of the distribution model, which is one of the components of the mixing evaluation model. The indicators presented in this model are highly ambiguous and complex; Therefore, in order to explain this concept, it used interdisciplinary studies and borrowed from biodiversity concepts and developed on based on urban development paradigms Based on Urban Mixed land use paradigms that directly affect the environment. The most important indicator of species diversity evaluation in ecological concepts is "Shannon Entropy Model", which includes two indicators of number and species. In order to develop this model, researches, theories, models, methods of evaluation of "diversity" were investigated. The implications of these indicators were very complex and ambiguous, and considering these indices simultaneously, they added ambiguity. Some of these indicators overlap and others have had a different degree of significance. In addition to the extracted indexes based on the Qualitative Content analysis method, using Delphi Method new indexes was extracted based on expert opinions and experts. The statistical methods and Scatter, Deflection Point & Qualitative Content data Processing Method were used to evaluate and prioritize the extracted results. The results of all of the concepts and indicators examined were described as the "Place Diversity Model (PDM)".
Extended Abstract
Introduction: Although, the significance of development of the Urban Mixed land use approach is specified in the urbanization and urban planning process but this approach is not necessarily a dominant approach but also it produces the structure of the city to for the contemporary paradigms of urban planning such as New Urbanism, smart growth. The notable issue of urban mixed development is that this form of development is a form of Urban "Place Making". For the dynamics of this new approach, it is necessary to rethink the factors and elements that the structure and form of the city that generates diversity. Diversity Index is a subset of the distribution model, which is one of the components of the mixing evaluation model.
Methodology: The philosophical perspective of this research is an exploratory and deductive research approach. Research Method the qualitative research and the techniques used are Delphi method and Shannon technique and statistical methods, "scattered points" and "breakpoints" are used. The statistical population of this study includes all experts and experts in urban area. Since the sampling and selection of experts in the Delphi method was based on purposive sampling and not random, the subjects were selected according to the criteria of the research subject. Data collection tools are specialized texts, observation, interviews and documents and urban planning criteria. The mixed-use scale is the scale of a metropolitan area to a building that emphasizes neighborhoods in this study.
Results and discussion: The indicators presented in this model are highly ambiguous and complex; therefore, in order to explain this concept, it used interdisciplinary studies and borrowed from biodiversity concepts and developed on based on urban development paradigms Based on Urban Mixed land use paradigms that directly affect the environment. The most important indicator of species diversity evaluation in ecological concepts is "Shannon Entropy Model", which includes two indicators of number and species. In order to develop this model, researches, theories, models, methods of evaluation of "diversity" were investigated. The implications of these indicators were very complex and ambiguous, and considering these indices simultaneously, they added ambiguity. Some of these indicators overlap and others have had a different degree of significance. In addition to the extracted indexes based on the Qualitative Content analysis method, using Delphi Method new indexes was extracted based on expert opinions and experts. The statistical methods and Scatter, Deflection Point & Qualitative Content data Processing Method were used to evaluate and prioritize the extracted results. The results of all of the concepts and indicators examined were described as the "Place Diversity Model (PDM)". Category "A" with average batch weight (0.310) includes land use mixing index, category "B" with average batch weight (0.270) including land use per capita, neighborhood access, production rate Travel and intersection density, category "C" with mean category weight (0.240) including occupancy density indices, housing mixing grade and plaque area, and category "D" with mean category weight (0.180) including density indices Demographic, ownership, sex, and age composition are in fact category "A" with the mean weight of the category (0.310) being the most important and category "D" having the least weight of the category (0.180) being the least important.
Conclusion: How the socioeconomic aggregation of urban contexts is related to the composition of community groups, activities, uses, buildings and public open spaces of the city. Hybrid developments are related to the variety of people's wants and their lifestyles, and must be adapted to the cultural needs of the people, and are, in a sense, their physical expression. Another condition for achieving diversity in the hybrid urban development pattern is the real estate development conditions in these complexes, which is a very complex and ambiguous dimension. Homes should be varied, so that for all social groups based in mixed locations, it should be possible to choose and pay in terms of purchases and rentals. In this case, one can expect more people to choose and encourage them to live. The housing model should be able to accommodate all age groups, from the elderly to the young, and from all low-income to high-income social groups, to the other purpose of the complex development of land uses that combine and bring together generations and social groups.
_||_
