چارچوب مفهوم پایداری در طراحی محیط از دیدگاه معماران و معماران منظر
محورهای موضوعی : معماری و شهرسازی
مرتضی ادیب
1
(
استادیار گروه معماری منظر، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی، تهران.
)
سعید نوروزیان ملکی
2
(
استادیار، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
)
کلید واژه: پایداری, معماری, معماری منظر, روش دلفی,
چکیده مقاله :
زمینه و هدف: پایداری واژه ای است که امروزه در بسیاری از زمینه های مربوط به توسعه و ساخت و ساز به صورت مستمر در چارچوب گفتمان حوزه های مزبور به کار گرفته می‌شود. بررسی مفهوم پایداری با تاکید بر پایداری محیطی رابطه متقابل دو عامل اصلی انسان و محیط را مورد تاکید قرار می‌دهد. سکونت گاه های بشری و سیستم‌های اقتصادی انسان با محیطی که در آن زندگی می کنند به هم آمیخته است. در این پژوهش تلاش شده است با بررسی و درک صحیح و آگاهانه از مولفه های تاثیرگذار بر موضوع پایداری، به شناسایی اثرگذاری و تحقق پذیری اصول مطرح در زمینه پایداری در طراحی محیط پرداخته شود. روش بررسی: متناسب با پژوهش، با روش تحلیل محتوا به تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات پرداخته شد، سپس برای سنجش شاخص های مورد بررسی از روش پیمایشی جهت پاسخ دادن به فرضیات پژوهش استفاده گردید. در این راستا با مطالعه منابع موجود، مولفه های مؤثر بر مقوله پایداری محیطی استخراج گردید. با فرض وجود هم بستگی مثبت بین متغیرهای مستقل و وابسته، با طرح، توزیع و جمع آوری پرسش نامه، آرا و عقاید جامعه متخصصان، مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. به این منظور، 45 پرسش نامه در بین اساتید معماری و معماری منظر دانشگاه های شهیدبهشتی، تهران ، علم و صنعت ایران، تربیت مدرس و بین المللی امام خمینی توزیع شد. با حذف پرسش نامه های ناقص، در نهایت 31 پرسش نامه مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. یافته‌ها: میزان تأثیر و اولویت مولفه های ”رابطه انسان-طبیعت“، ”محدودیت ها“، ”مکان“، ”تنوع“، ”رابطه متقابل“، ”آموزش“ و ”جریان اطلاعات“ به دست آمده در بخش موضوع تحقیق ، توسط متخصصان سنجیده شد. به منظور وزن دهی هر یک از مولفه های اولویت بندی شده توسط متخصصین ، وزن هر مولفه با توجه به تعداد دفعات قرارگیری در هر یک از اولویت ها و با اعمال ضریب مربوط به آن اولویت محاسبه گردید. بحث و نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج نشان داد که اختلافات آماری معناداری میان اولویت بندی متخصصان معماری و معماری منظر نسبت به برخی از اصول پایداری در طراحی محیط وجود دارد.
Background and Objective: Sustainable development with emphasis on environmental sustainability addresses the interaction between humans and the environment. In this study, it has been attempted to investigate and realize a clear understanding of the principles that affect the issue of sustainability in environmental design. Method: The collected data were analyzed through the content analysis. Following the identification of the criteria, the Delphi study was set up to identify which of them were most important and to derive the priority weightings for each. This study comprised two questionnaire rounds that were sent to two different sets of panel members. 45 invitations were sent out. The experts were selected from the people with substantial knowledge in the field of planning and design. They were from the pool of academics and practitioners involved in environmental design, landscape architecture and urban design. 31 experts agreed to participate and completed the first and second rounds, while 16 architects and 15 landscape architects participated in both rounds, meeting the target. Findings: “Importance” indicates whether such attributes were deemed important by the expert; “suitability” indicates whether such attributes, while important, were suitable tools to evaluate the sustainability in environmental design. This study represents the results of the ranking and weighting of the factors by the experts according to a set of factors. Discussion and Conclusion: The results of ANOVA showed statistically significant differences among the architects and landscape architects and their opinions about several factors.
1- Dehkhoda, A. A., 2011. Persian encyclopedia of Dehkhoda. Iran: Tehran University Publication.
2- Soanes, C. and Stevenson, A. 2008. Concise Oxford English Dictionary. Clarendon Press.
3- Edwards, A. R., 2005. The sustainability revolution: portrait of a paradigm shift. Gabriola, BC: New Society Publishers.
4- WCED. 1987. Our common future. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
5- Benson, J., 2013. Environmental Ethics: An introduction with readings. Routledge.
6- Bass, S. and Dalal-Clayton, B., 2012. Sustainable development strategies: a resource book. Routledge.
7- Klumpp, M., de Leeuw, S., Regattieri, A. and de Souza, R., 2015. Humanitarian Logistics and Sustainability. Springer.
8- Whitehead, M., 2007. Spaces of sustainability: geographical perspectives on the sustainable society. London; New York: Routledge.
9- Williams, D. E., 2007. Sustainable design: ecology, architecture, and planning. Hoboken: Wiley.
10- Rodríguez, S. I., Roman, M. S., Sturhahn, S. and Terry, E. H., 2002. Sustainability assessment and reporting for the University of Michigan's Ann Arbor campus. Master Thesis of Science in Natural Resources and Environment. University of Michigan.
11- Naess, A. and Sessions, G., 1995. Platform Principles of the Deep Ecology Movement. In A. R. Drengson & Y. Inoue (Eds.), The deep ecology movement : an introductory anthology (pp. 49-53). Berkeley, Calif. North Atlantic Books.
12- Wege, P. M., 2006. The Earth charter preamble. Grand Rapids, Mich. Wege Foundation.
13- Lyle, J. T., 1994. Regenerative design for sustainable development. New York: John Wiley.
14- Todd, N. J. and Todd, J., 1994. From eco-cities to living machines: principles of ecological design. Berkeley, Calif. North Atlantic Books.
15- Van der Ryn, S. and Cowan, S., 1996. Ecological design. Washington, D.C. Island Press.
16- McHarg, I. L., 1992. Design with Nature. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
17- Orr, D. W., 2002. The nature of design: ecology, culture, and human intention. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
18- McDonough, W. and Braungart, M., 2010. Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. MacMillan.
19- Mehta, M. D. and Ouellet, É., 1995. Environmental sociology: theory and practice. North York, Ont. Captus Press.
20- Milton, K., 1993. Environmentalism: the view from anthropology. London; New York: Routledge.
21- Thayer, R. L., 1994. Gray world, green heart: Technology, nature, and sustainable landscape. New York: Wiley.
22- MPEQB, Minnesota Planning Environmental Quality board. 1998. Investing In Minnesota’s future: an agenda for sustaining our quality of life.
23- Mahmoudi, H., and Veisi, H., 2005. An Environmental Extension and Education Approach to Primary Environmental Care. Environmental Sciences, 8, pp. 57-64.
24- Eltyaminia, R. and Hosseini, A., 2015. Hegemonic worldview and its relationship with environmental Crises in the world. Journal of Human and Environment, 13 (2), pp. 77-92.
25- Karimi Pour Zarei, A. A., Babaie Semiromi, F. and Yousefi, H., 2013. Investigation the Role of Environmental Instructions in Reduction the Use of polyethylene Material (Case study: District 9 of Tehran). Journal of Environmental Education & Sustainable Development, 1 (4), pp. 58-68.
26- Devall, B. and Sessions, G. 1985. Deep ecology. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith.
27- Resource Renewal Institute. 2001. The Netherlands National Environmental Policy Plan. Retrieved 27, Dec, 2009 http://www.rri.org/greenplans_netherlands.html
28- Thompson, I. 2007. The ethics of sustainability. Landscape and sustainability (pp. 16-37). New York: Routledge.
29- Linstone, H. A. and Turoff, M., 2002. The Delphi method: Techniques and application [on-line]. Available: http://is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/.
30- Stone Fish, L. and Busby, D. M., 2005. The Delphi method. In D.H. Sprenkle and F.P. Piercy (Eds.), Research Methods in Family Therapy. (2nd Edition), (pp. 238-253), New York: Guilford Press.
31- Jenkins, D. A. and Smith, T. E., 1994. Applying Delphi methodology in family therapy research. Contemporary Family Therapy, 16 (5), pp. 411-430.
32- Norouzian-Maleki, S., Bell, S., Hosseini, S. B. and Faizi, M., 2015. Developing and testing a framework for the assessment of neighbourhood liveability in two contrasting countries: Iran and Estonia. Ecological Indicators, 48, pp. 263-271.
1- Dehkhoda, A. A., 2011. Persian encyclopedia of Dehkhoda. Iran: Tehran University Publication.
2- Soanes, C. and Stevenson, A. 2008. Concise Oxford English Dictionary. Clarendon Press.
3- Edwards, A. R., 2005. The sustainability revolution: portrait of a paradigm shift. Gabriola, BC: New Society Publishers.
4- WCED. 1987. Our common future. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
5- Benson, J., 2013. Environmental Ethics: An introduction with readings. Routledge.
6- Bass, S. and Dalal-Clayton, B., 2012. Sustainable development strategies: a resource book. Routledge.
7- Klumpp, M., de Leeuw, S., Regattieri, A. and de Souza, R., 2015. Humanitarian Logistics and Sustainability. Springer.
8- Whitehead, M., 2007. Spaces of sustainability: geographical perspectives on the sustainable society. London; New York: Routledge.
9- Williams, D. E., 2007. Sustainable design: ecology, architecture, and planning. Hoboken: Wiley.
10- Rodríguez, S. I., Roman, M. S., Sturhahn, S. and Terry, E. H., 2002. Sustainability assessment and reporting for the University of Michigan's Ann Arbor campus. Master Thesis of Science in Natural Resources and Environment. University of Michigan.
11- Naess, A. and Sessions, G., 1995. Platform Principles of the Deep Ecology Movement. In A. R. Drengson & Y. Inoue (Eds.), The deep ecology movement : an introductory anthology (pp. 49-53). Berkeley, Calif. North Atlantic Books.
12- Wege, P. M., 2006. The Earth charter preamble. Grand Rapids, Mich. Wege Foundation.
13- Lyle, J. T., 1994. Regenerative design for sustainable development. New York: John Wiley.
14- Todd, N. J. and Todd, J., 1994. From eco-cities to living machines: principles of ecological design. Berkeley, Calif. North Atlantic Books.
15- Van der Ryn, S. and Cowan, S., 1996. Ecological design. Washington, D.C. Island Press.
16- McHarg, I. L., 1992. Design with Nature. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
17- Orr, D. W., 2002. The nature of design: ecology, culture, and human intention. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
18- McDonough, W. and Braungart, M., 2010. Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. MacMillan.
19- Mehta, M. D. and Ouellet, É., 1995. Environmental sociology: theory and practice. North York, Ont. Captus Press.
20- Milton, K., 1993. Environmentalism: the view from anthropology. London; New York: Routledge.
21- Thayer, R. L., 1994. Gray world, green heart: Technology, nature, and sustainable landscape. New York: Wiley.
22- MPEQB, Minnesota Planning Environmental Quality board. 1998. Investing In Minnesota’s future: an agenda for sustaining our quality of life.
23- Mahmoudi, H., and Veisi, H., 2005. An Environmental Extension and Education Approach to Primary Environmental Care. Environmental Sciences, 8, pp. 57-64.
24- Eltyaminia, R. and Hosseini, A., 2015. Hegemonic worldview and its relationship with environmental Crises in the world. Journal of Human and Environment, 13 (2), pp. 77-92.
25- Karimi Pour Zarei, A. A., Babaie Semiromi, F. and Yousefi, H., 2013. Investigation the Role of Environmental Instructions in Reduction the Use of polyethylene Material (Case study: District 9 of Tehran). Journal of Environmental Education & Sustainable Development, 1 (4), pp. 58-68.
26- Devall, B. and Sessions, G. 1985. Deep ecology. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith.
27- Resource Renewal Institute. 2001. The Netherlands National Environmental Policy Plan. Retrieved 27, Dec, 2009 http://www.rri.org/greenplans_netherlands.html
28- Thompson, I. 2007. The ethics of sustainability. Landscape and sustainability (pp. 16-37). New York: Routledge.
29- Linstone, H. A. and Turoff, M., 2002. The Delphi method: Techniques and application [on-line]. Available: http://is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/.
30- Stone Fish, L. and Busby, D. M., 2005. The Delphi method. In D.H. Sprenkle and F.P. Piercy (Eds.), Research Methods in Family Therapy. (2nd Edition), (pp. 238-253), New York: Guilford Press.
31- Jenkins, D. A. and Smith, T. E., 1994. Applying Delphi methodology in family therapy research. Contemporary Family Therapy, 16 (5), pp. 411-430.
32- Norouzian-Maleki, S., Bell, S., Hosseini, S. B. and Faizi, M., 2015. Developing and testing a framework for the assessment of neighbourhood liveability in two contrasting countries: Iran and Estonia. Ecological Indicators, 48, pp. 263-271.
