تحلیل عوامل موثر بر شکل گیری ساختار چندهسته ای شهرها (نمونه موردی: کلانشهر کرمانشاه)

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

عزیز محمدیاری ¹ (دانشجوی دکترای تخصصی جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، واحد مرند، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مرند، ایران)
بختیار عزت پناه ² (استادیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، واحد مرند، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مرند، ایران)
کریم حسین زاده دلیر ³ (استاد گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، واحد مرند، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مرند، ایران)

تاریخ دریافت : 1400/07/26 تاریخ پذیرش : 1400/10/12 تاریخ انتشار : 1402/09/01

کلید واژه: کاربری اراضی, الگوی توزیع فضایی, هسته شهری, چندهسته‌ای, کلانشهر کرمانشاه,

چکیده مقاله :

تجربه توسعه شهری نشان داده است که بخش مرکزی شهرها به مرور توان خود را در برخی ابعاد به ویژه در اسکان طبقات مرفه و ارائه خدمات نوین و پیشرفته از دست می‏دهند. در نتیجه شهرها به طور طبیعی به پهنه‏های جدید جهت ساماندهی جمعیت، فعالیت و خدمات روی آورده و مناطق جدید شهری در قالب ساختار چندهسته‏ای پدید می‏آورند. پژوهش حاضر از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی ـ غیرتجربـی و در چارچوب الگوی تحلیلی ـ موردی انجام شده‏ است. جهت تحلیل داده‏ها از مدل GMM، آمار فضایی، روش پیترهال و شاخص اختلاط کاربری استفاده شده است. مطابق با نتایج مناطق 1، 3 و 4 بیشترین میزان فعالیت و کارکرد را داشته‏اند. ارزیابی ساختار شهر وجود یک هسته قوی در منطقه 1 و هسته‏های فرعی ضعیف‏تری در مناطق را نشان می‌دهد، اما کارکرد‏ اصلی در شهر کرمانشاه دارای الگوی تک هسته‏ای است. مطابق نتایج فرضیه صفر آزمون موران (0.003) در مناطق 8گانه کلانشهر کرمانشاه سه فاکتور فاصله‌، درجه تمرکز و عامل دسترسی در سطح معناداری بالایی تأیید می‌شود. ضریب خودهمبستگی فضایی در سطح بالایی معنادار است و مؤید وجود وابستگی فضایی در اجزا اخلال مدل رشد هسته مسکونی و ارتباط معنادار آن با سایر کاربری‌های شهری است. به این معنی که شوک وارد بر یک هسته، به دیگر هسته‌ها نیز سرایت کرده است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که رشد هسته مسکونی در یک منطقه تا چه میزان متأثر از شوک وارد بر تابع فاصله و میزان دسترسی به هر هسته در سایر مناطق شهر بوده است. در بین متغیرهای موجود، درجه تمرکز یا تفرق جمعیت (117.03) و درصد توزیع کاربری‌های مسکونی (0.7402) به عنوان مهم‌ترین عوامل و متغیر فاصله (0.687-) به عنوان متغیر کنترل، دارای اثر منفی بر رشد و توزیع هسته تجاری بوده است به این معنی که کاربری‌های تجاری با فاصله بیشتر از هم، رشد پایین‌تری داشته‌اند.

چکیده انگلیسی:

The experience of urban development has shown that the central part of cities gradually lose their power in some dimensions, especially in the housing of the affluent classes and the provision of new and advanced services. As a result, cities naturally turn to new areas to organize population, activities, and services, and create new urban areas in the form of a multicore structure. The present study is applied-non-experimental in terms of purpose and in the framework of analytical-case model. GMM model, spatial statistics, Peterhall method and user mixing index were used to analyze the data. According to the results, regions 1, 3 and 4 had the highest level of activity and function. Assessing the structure of the city shows the existence of a strong nucleus in region 1 and weaker sub-nuclei in the regions, but the main function in the city of Kermanshah has a single-core pattern. According to the results of the null hypothesis of Moran test (0.003) in the eight areas of Kermanshah metropolis, the three factors of distance, degree of concentration and access factor are confirmed at a high level of significance. The spatial autocorrelation coefficient is significant at a high level and confirms the existence of spatial dependence in the components of the disruption of the residential core growth model and its significant relationship with other urban uses. This means that the shock on one nucleus has spread to other nuclei. The results show that the growth of residential nuclei in one area has been affected by the shock as a function of distance and the amount of access to each nucleus in other areas of the city. Among the existing variables, the degree of concentration or dispersion of the population (117.03) and the percentage of distribution of residential uses (0.7402) as the most important factors and the variable of distance (-0.687) as a control variable, had a negative effect on the growth and distribution of commercial core. This means that commercial applications with a greater distance from each other have had lower growth.
 
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Polycentric city is a descriptive concept that over time has become a normative, positive theory and an analytical framework. Multi-core development has different meanings depending on the scale of the space we report on, and different meanings for policymakers. Multicellular development an important concept in spatial planning involves linking a number of locations in such a way that they form a network in which they work together to develop and support their businesses, services and facilities. It is defined in an urban realm and is accepted as a spatial reciprocal form of being mono-nuclear.
Methodology
The purpose of this study is spatial analysis of effective factors in the formation of new nuclei in Kermanshah metropolis. In terms of purpose, research is an applied type that has been done in a descriptive-analytical method and based on documentary library studies and field studies. Due to the nature of the data and the impossibility of controlling the behavior of the effective variables in the problem, this research has been non-experimental and has been conducted within the framework of a case-study model. The study period was the summer of 1400 and the study sample was a statistical block and all urban land use of Kermanshah metropolis and obtaining the main data, mainly using the data of the Statistics Center of Iran, the above documents include a comprehensive and detailed plan.
Results and discussion
According to the results, spatial autocorrelation coefficient is significant at a high level, which confirms the existence of spatial dependence in the components of the disruption of the residential core growth model and its significant relationship with other urban uses. This means that the shock on one nucleus has spread to other nuclei. In other words, the spatial autocorrelation coefficient shows how much the growth of a residential core in one area has been affected by the shock effect as a function of distance and the amount of access to each core in other areas of the city. Among the existing variables, the degree of population concentration or dispersion and the percentage of distribution of residential uses are known as the most important factors affecting the growth of new nuclei. The distance variable as a control variable has a negative effect on the growth and distribution of the commercial core and is significant at a high level; This means that commercial applications with a greater distance from each other have had lower growth. In the spatial analysis of administrative and educational services, the concentration of the mentioned units in the central core of Kermanshah is significant. These two activities, as important and comprehensive urban services, play a key role in attracting daily travel and meeting the needs of citizens. Statistical data and related maps show that the central core of Kermanshah metropolis in providing educational and administrative services still dominates other areas and new centers with this degree of concentration have not yet been formed in Kermanshah metropolis. The most important and significant industrial elements in Kermanshah metropolis are oil and petrochemical industries, iron and construction materials.
Conclusion
The basis for the evolution and evolution of the spatial structure of Kermanshah is coherence, livability and efficiency, the cohesive structure of which requires network and multicenter ossification due to the increase in population of this metropolis during the last decade. The pattern of development of residential activity is different from other activities, and that is the formation of several nuclei other than zone 1 as the physical nucleus; In other words, other residential nuclei have been formed as competitors in regions 6, 5, 4 and 2, which can play an effective role in the formation of multi-core Kermanshah. Another activity is related to industrial activity, this activity is more concentrated in the southern and southwestern areas of Kermanshah and is very different from other activities; As most activities tend to be centered, this activity tends to the periphery and also proves its distribution pattern. Another activity is related to the distribution pattern of tourism and recreation centers, this activity is more inclined to the east and the commercial center of the city, and its most important core is located in areas 1, 3 and 4

منابع و مأخذ:

• References

• Acheampong, R. A. (2020). Spatial structure, intra-urban commuting patterns and travel mode choice: Analyses of relationships in the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana. Cities, 96, 102432.


• Anabestani, A., Jafari, F. (2021). Analysis of Key Proponents Affecting Land Use Change of Pri-urban Settlements in Mashhad metropolitan with approach future study, jupm, 11(43), 17-34. [In Persian].


• Abdollahi torkamani, Z., yazdani, M., Ghanbari, A. (2019). Analyzing the spatial structure of the city with an emphasis on spatial connectivity and connectivity Metropolis of Tabriz, jupm, 10(37), 25-40. [In Persian].


• Aghdaie, M. H., Zolfani, S. H., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2013). Decision Making in Machine Tool Selection: An Integrated Approach with SWARA and COPRAS-G Methods. Sprendimo Priėmimas Pasirenkant Mechanines Stakles: Jungtinis SWARA Ir COPRAS-G Metodas, jupm, 24(1), 5–17. [In Persian].


• Burgalassi, David, and Luzzati Tommaso (2015): Urban spatial structure and environmental emissions: A survey of the literature and some empirical evidence for Italian NUTS 3 regions. Cities, 49 134-48.


• Bertaud, A. (2003). Tehran spatial structure: Constraints and opportunities for future development. Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran.


• Burger, M., and Meijers, E. (2012). Form follows function? Linking morphological and functional polycentricity. Urban Studies, 49(5): 1127-1149.


• Burger, M.J., De Goei, B., van der Laan, L., and Huisman, F.J.M. (2011). Heterogeneous development of metropolitan spatial structure: evidence from commuting patterns in English and Welsh city-regions, 1981-2001. Cities, 28(2): 160-170.


• Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons.


• Coppola, P., Papa, E., Angelo, G., & Carpenters, G. (2014). Urban form and sustainability: the case study of Rome. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 160, 557-566.


• Derudder, B., Liu, X., Wang, M., Zhang, W., Wu, K., & Caset, F. (2021). Measuring polycentric urban development: The importance of accurately determining the ‘balance’between ‘centers’. Cities, 111, 103009.


• Dadashpoor, H., & Yousefi, Z. (2018). Centralization or decentralization? A review on the effects of information and communication technology on urban spatial structure. Cities, 78, 194-205. [In Persian].


• Davoudi, S. (2003). European briefing polycentricity in European spatial planning from an analytical tool to a normative agenda. European Planning Studies, 11(8): 979-999.


• Ghadami, Mu; Divasalar, A; Ranjir, z; Gholamian Agha Mahalli, T (2013) Strategic evaluation of the spatial structure of the city in the framework of sustainability (Sari case study), Quarterly Journal of Economics and Urban Management, No. 3, pp. 16-1. [In Persian].


• Giuliano, G., Redfearn, C., Agarwal, A., Li, C.and Zhuang, D. (2007). Employment concentrations in Los Angeles, 1980–2000. Environment and Planning A, 39(12): 2935-2957.


• Griffith, D.A., and Wong, D.W. (2007). Modeling population density across major US cities: a polycentric spatial regression approach. Journal of Geographical Systems, 9(1): 53-75.


• He, X., Cao, Y., & Zhou, C. (2021). Evaluation of Polycentric Spatial Structure in the Urban Agglomeration of the Pearl River Delta (PRD) Based on Multi-Source Big Data Fusion. Remote Sensing, 13(18), 3639.


• Hashemi B. (2021). Analysis of the role of different functional nuclei on the spatial structure of Karaj metropolis. GeoRes; 36 (4) :1000-0.


• Hall, P.G., and Pain, K. (Eds.). (2006). The Polycentric Metropolis: Learning from Mega-City Regions in Europe. Routledge.


• Jansson, M., Fors, H., Sundevall, E. P., Bengtsson, A., Lerstrup, I., Hurley, P., ... & Randrup, T. B. (2020). User-oriented urban open space governance and management. In Urban Open Space Governance and Management (pp. 68-92). Routledge.


• Krehl, A. (2015). Urban spatial structure: An interaction between employment and built-up volumes. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 2(1), 290-308.


• Leslie, T.F., and HUallacháin, B.O. (2006). Polycentric phoenix. Economic Geography, 82(2): 167-192.


• Liu, L., Chen, H., & Liu, T. (2020). Study on urban spatial function mixture and individual activity space from the perspectives of resident activity. IEEE Access, 8, 184137-184150.


• Liu, K., Murayama, Y., & Ichinose, T. (2020). Using A New Approach for Revealing the Spatiotemporal Patterns of Functional Urban Polycentricity: A Case Study in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area. Sustainable Cities and Society, 102176.


• Liu, K., Murayama, Y., & Ichinose, T. (2021). Exploring the relationship between functional urban polycentricity and the regional characteristics of human mobility: A multi-view analysis in the Tokyo metropolitan area. Cities, 111, 103109.


• Li, Y. (2020). Towards concentration and decentralization: The evolution of urban spatial structure of Chinese cities, 2001–2016. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 80, 101425.


• Lotfi, S; Divasalar, A; Sarfi, A (2013) A Study of the Spatial Pattern of the City and the Efficiency of Urban Access (Case Study of Damghan), First Year, Second Issue, pp. 101-77. [In Persian].


• Manoochehri miyandoab, D., anvari, A., ahar, H. (2019). Analysis of Functional Core role in Creating Imbalance Spatial Structure (Case study: The Metropolis of Tehran). Geography and Territorial Spatial Arrangement, 9(33), 23-40.


• Manole, S. D., Tache, A., & Popescu, O. (2018). Evaluating the Romanian polycentricism using the Functional Urban Areas determined on the basis of statistical indicators. Romanian Statistical Review Supplement, 66(2), 159-177.


• Manouchehri Miandoab, A; Anwari, A; Ahar, H (1398) Analysis of the role of functional cores in creating imbalance of spatial structure (Case study: Tehran metropolis), Quarterly Journal of Geography and Urban-Regional Planning, Ninth Year, No. 33, pp. 40-23. [In Persian].


• Malekzadeh, N., Dadashpoor, H., Rafieian, M. (2021). A meta-study of research related to urban and regional spatial structures in Iran; from 2001 to 2019. Journal of Iranian Architecture & Urbanism(JIAU), 12(1), 37-57. [In Persian].


• Meijers, E. J., & Burger, M. J. (2010). Spatial structure and productivity in US metropolitan areas. Environment and planning A, 42(6), 1383-1402.


• Muñiz, I., & Garcia-López, M. À. (2019). Urban form and spatial structure as determinants of the ecological footprint of commuting. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 67, 334-350.


• Rodrigue, J. P., & CoMtoiS, C. SlaCk b., 2013. The geography of transport systems. London: Routledge.


• Statistics Center of Iran (2016). General Population and Housing Census, Detailed Results of Urban Areas, Kermanshah


• Sasaki, K. (1990). The establishment of a subcenter and urban spatial structure. Environment and Planning A, 22(3): 369-383.


• Sat, A. N. (2018). Monocentric or polycentric? Defining morphological structure of Nuts-2 regions of Turkey from 2000 to 2016. Geographical Pannonia, 22(1), 1-13.


• Yang, J., French, S., Holt, J., and Zhang, X. (2012). Measuring the Structure of US Metropolitan Areas, 1970–2000: Spatial Statistical Metrics and an Application to commuting Behavior. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(2): 197-209.


• Yue, W. Liu, Y. & Fan, P. (2010). Polycentric urban development: the case of Hangzhou. Environment and Planning A, 42(3), 563-577.


• Vega, S. H., & Elhorst, J. P. (2013, August). On spatial econometric models, spillover effects, and W. In 53rd ERSA Congress, Palermo, Italy.