ارزیابی کیفیت محیط‌زیست شهری و تأثیر آن بر رفاه ذهنی در شهرهای مرزنشین (مطالعه موردی: پیرانشهر)
سنار ملاحمد
1
(
دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران.
)
علی پناهی
2
(
استادیارگروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران
)
حسن احمدزاده
3
(
دانشیارگروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران
)
کلید واژه: محیط‌زیست شهری, محیط‌زیست طبیعی, محیط‌زیست انسان‌ساخت, رفاه ذهنی, پیرانشهر.,
چکیده مقاله :
کیفیت محیط‌زیست شهری یکی از عوامل تأثیرگذار بر ارتقاء قابلیت زندگی در شهرها و شکل‌گیری رفاه ذهنی می‌باشد. توجه به این موضوع به‌ویژه در مناطق مرزی که علاوه بر دوری از مرکز، با چالش‌های متعدد در ابعاد مختلف اجتماعی، اقتصادی و کالبدی روبه‌رو هستند، ضرورتی اجتناب‌ناپذیر می‌باشد. در این راستا، هدف از تحقیق حاضر ارزیابی کیفیت محیط‌زیست شهری و تأثیر آن بر رفاه ذهنی در شهر پیرانشهر می‌باشد. روش تحقیق آمیخته (کمی-کیفی)، با هدف کاربردی و ماهیت تحلیلی-اکتشافی می‌باشد که در راستای تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات از مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری در نرم‌افزار Amos و ضریب رگرسیون لگاریتمی و آزمون پیرسون در نرم‌افزار SPSS استفاده شده است. جامعه‌ی آماری تحقیق نیز شامل شهروندان پیرانشهر می‌باشد که با استفاده از روش کوکران حجم نمونه 384 نفر تعیین گردیده است. یافته‌های تحقیق نشان می‌دهد مقدار بحرانی کیفیت محیط‌زیست طبیعی شهر بالای 96/1 محاسبه شده و در سطح اطمینان 95 درصد مطلوب می‌باشد، درحالی‌که کیفیت محیط‌زیست انسان‌ساخت با مقدار بحرانی 17/1 نامطلوب است. همچنین در شاخص‌های جزئی محیط‌زیست طبیعی، پایداری محیطی و پوشش گیاهی و فضای سبز و در شاخص‌های جزئی محیط‌زیست انسان‌ساخت امکانات و خدمات زیرساختی دارای وضعیت مطلوبی می‌باشند. از طرفی در شاخص رفاه ذهنی، مؤلفه‌های مشارکت و انسجام اجتماعی، احساس امنیت و تعلقی عاطفی در وضعیت مطلوب و مؤلفه‌های احساس شادی، امیدواری و احساس آسایش روحی و روانی در وضعیت نامطلوبی قرار دارند. نتایج نیز نشان می‌دهد در سطح اطمینان 95 درصد رابطه‌ی معناداری بین کیفیت محیط‌زیست شهری و شکل‌گیری رفاه ذهنی شهروندان وجود دارد.
چکیده انگلیسی :
Nowadays, the quality of the urban environment is one of the factors influencing the improvement of livability in cities and the formation of mental well-being. Paying attention to this issue is an inevitable necessity, especially in the border areas, which, in addition to being far from the center, face numerous challenges in different social, economic and physical dimensions. In this regard, the aim of the current research is to evaluate the quality of urban environment and its effect on mental well-being in Piranshahr city. The research method in the present study is mixed (quantitative-qualitative), with an applied purpose and an analytical-exploratory nature, in order to analyze the information, structural equation modeling in Amos software and logarithmic regression coefficient and Pearson test in SPSS software were used. The statistical population of the research also includes the citizens of Piranshahr, and the sample size of 384 people was determined using Cochran's method. The findings of the research show that the critical value of the quality of the natural environment of the city is calculated above 1.96 and is favorable at the 95% confidence level, while the quality of the man-made environment is unfavorable with a critical value of 1.17. Also, in the partial indicators of the natural environment, environmental sustainability, vegetation and green space, and in the partial indicators of the man-made environment, only infrastructure facilities and services have a favorable status. On the other hand, in the mental well-being index, the three components of participation and social cohesion, feeling of security and emotional belonging are in a favorable state, and the components of happiness, hope, and feeling of mental and psychological comfort are in an unfavorable state. Also, the results show that at the 95% confidence level, there is a significant relationship between the quality of the urban environment and the formation of citizens' mental well-being.
1- Aletta, F., Oberman, T., & Kang, J. (2018). Associations between positive health-related effects and soundscapes perceptual constructs: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112392
2- Anderson, J. (2015). “Living in a communal garden” associated with well-being while reducing urban sprawl by 40%: A mixed-methods cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Public Health, 3(173), 1-9. . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2015.00173
3- Asadi, Y., Jelokhani-Niaraki, M.R., & Ezimand, K. (2020). Evaluation of environmental quality of urban life by spatial multi criteria analysis (case study: region 6 of Tehran). Journal of Human Geography Research, 52(1), 367-383. https://doi.org/10.22059/jhgr.2020.288508.1008003 [In Persian].
4- Baba, C., Kearns, A., McIntosh, E., Tannahill, C., & Lewsey, J. (2017). Is empowerment a route to improving mental health and wellbeing in an urban regeneration (UR) context? Urban Studies, 54(7), 1619–1637. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016632435
5- Borsekova, K., Kourtit, K., & Nijkamp, P. (2017). Smart development, spatial sustainability and environmental quality. Journal of Habitat International, 68, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.08.001
6- Cao, X. (2016). How does neighborhood design affect life satisfaction? Evidence from twin cities. Travel Behaviour and Society, 5, 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2015.07.001
7- Cao, X., Wu, X., & Yuan, Y. (2018). Examining built environmental correlates of neighborhood satisfaction: A focus on analysis approaches. Journal of Planning Literature, 33(4), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412218765443
8- Cloutier, S., Berejnoi, E., Russell, S., Ann Morrison, B., & Ross, A. (2018). Toward a holistic sustainable and happy neighborhood development assessment tool: A critical review of relevant literature. Ecological Indicators, 89, 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.01.055
9- Cosby, A. G., McDoom-Echebiri, M. M., James, W., Khandekar, H., Brown, W., & Hanna, H. L. (2019). Growth and persistence of place-based mortality in the United States: The rural mortality penalty. American Journal of Public Health, 109(1), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304787
10- Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(4), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
11- Foroozesh, F., Monavari, S.M., Salmanmahiny, A., Robati, M., & Rahimi, R. (2021). Assessment of sustainable urban development based on a hybrid decision-making approach: Group fuzzy BWM, AHP, and TOPSIS–GIS. Sustainable Cities and Society, 76, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103402
12- Ghadermarzi, M., Zaki, Y., Mahdizadh, V., & Jamshidi, Y. (2019). Evaluation of the effective components in the stability of the security of border areas. Police order and security, 12(47), 203-228. https://dorl.net/20.1001.1.27830977.1398.12.3.9.1 [In Persian].
13- Glaeser, E. (2011). Triumph of the City: How our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer. Smarter, Greener, Healthier, and Happier Penguin Press, New York, NY.
14- Gong, W., Rui, J., & Li, T. (2024). Deciphering urban bike-sharing patterns: An in-depth analysis of natural environment and visual quality in New York's Citi bike system. Journal of Transport Geography, 115, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2024.103799
15- Heydari Tamrabadi, M., & Karami, T. (2022). Analyzing the role of urban landscape components on the quality of urban environment and environmental behavior of citizens (Case study: Districts of Karaj). Journal of Place and Space Research, 7(24), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.22034/jspr.2022.701820 [In Persian].
16- KahnGreen, M.E. (2006). Cities: Urban Growth and the Environment Brookings. Institution Press. 17- Kashef, M. (2016). Urban livability across disciplinary and professional boundaries. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 5(2), 239-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2016.03.003
18- Kent, J. L., & Thompson, S. (2014). The three domains of urban planning for health and well-being. Journal of Planning Literature, 29(3), 239–256. . https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412214520712
19- Khomenko, S., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Ambr`os, A., Wegener, S., & Mueller, N. (2020). Is a liveable city a healthy city? Health impacts of urban and transport planning in Vienna, Austria. Environmental Research, 183, 109238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109238
20- Kozaryn, A.O. (2013). City life: Rankings (Livability) Versus Perceptions (Satisfaction). Social Indicators Research, 110(2), 433-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9939-x
21- Liu, J., Nijkamp, P., Huang, X., & Lin, D. (2017). Urban livability and tourism development in China: Analysis of sustainable development by means of spatial panel data. Journal of Habitat International, 68, 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.02.005
22- Marans, R. W., & Stimson, R. (2011). An overview of quality of urban life. In R. W. Marans, & R. J. Stimson (Eds.), Investigating quality of urban life: Theory, methods, and empirical research (pp. 1–29). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
23- Moir, E., Moonen, T., & Clark, G. (2014). What are future cities? What are future cities? Origins, meanings and uses. The Business of Cities for the Foresight Future of Cities Project and the Future Cities Catapult, London.
24- Mouratidis, K. (2018). Rethinking how built environments influence subjective well-being: A new conceptual framework. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 11(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2017.1310749
25- Mouratidis, K. (2020). Commute satisfaction, neighborhood satisfaction, and housing satisfaction as predictors of subjective well-being and indicators of urban livability. Travel Behaviour and Society, 21, 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2020.07.006
26- Mouratidis, K. (2021). Urban planning and quality of life: A review of pathways linking the built environment to subjective well-being. Cities, 115, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103229
27- Nichol, J.E. and Wong, M.S. (2018). Assessing Urban Environmental Quality with Multiple Parameters. Urban remote sensing, Book preview (pp.253-269). . https://doi.org/10.1201/b15917-17
28- OECD. (2013). OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. Washington, DC: OECD Better Life Initiative.
29- Paul, A., & Sen, J. (2018). Livability assessment within a metropolis based on the impact of integrated urban geographic factors (IUGFs) on clustering urban centers of Kolkata. Cities, 74, 142-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.11.015
30- Pfeiffer, D., & Cloutier, S. (2016). Planning for happy neighborhoods. Journal of American Planning Association, 82(3), 267–279. . https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2016.1166347
31- Ruth, M., & Franklin, R.S. (2014), Livability for All? Conceptual Limits and Practical Implications. Applied Geography, 49, 18-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.09.018
32- Shamsoddini, A., Maleki, S., & Amiri Fahlyiani, M.R. (2013). An analysis on the rate Citizen's Satisfaction of livability and sustainability in urban environment (A case study of Noorabad Mamasani). Urban Structure and Function Studies, 1(4), 53-70. https://shahr.journals.umz.ac.ir/article_885.html [In Persian].
33- Shekhar, H., Schmidt, A. J., & Wehling, H.-W. (2019). Exploring wellbeing in human settlements - A spatial planning perspective. Habitat International, 87, 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.04.007
34- Sirgy, M. J. (2012). The psychology of quality of life: Hedonic well-being, life satisfaction and eudaimonia. (Vol. 50). Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media.
35- Streimikiene, D. (2015). Enviroment indicator for the assessment of quality of life. Intellectual Economic, 9(1), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intele.2015.10.001
36- Timmer, V., & nola-Kate, S. (2005). The world urban forum 2006. Vancouver working group discussion paper internation center for sustainable cities.
37- Tonne, C., Adair, L., Adlakha, D., Anguelovski, I., Belesova, K., Berger, M., … & Adli, M. (2021). Defining pathways to healthy sustainable urban development. Environment International, 146, 106236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106236
38- van den Berg, M., Wendel-Vos, W., van Poppel, M., Kemper, H., van Mechelen, W., & Maas, J. (2015). Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 14 (4), 806–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.07.008
39- Veenhoven, R. (2012). Happiness: Also known as “life satisfaction” and “subjective well-being”. In K. C. Land, A. C. Michalos, & M. J. Sirgy (Eds.), Handbook of social indicators and quality of life research (pp. 63–77). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
40- Wang, F., & Wang, D. (2016). Place, geographical context and subjective well-being: State of art and future directions. In Mobility, sociability and well-being of urban living (pp. 189–230). Berlin: Springer.
41- Zhang, S., Omar, A.H., Hashim, A.S., Alam, T., Khalifa, H.A.E., & Elkotb, M.A. (2023). Enhancing waste management and prediction of water quality in the sustainable urban environment using optimized algorithm of least square support vector machine and deep learning techniques. Urban Climate, 49, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2023.101487
