Implementation of Land-Use Policies to Promote Urban Resilience Case Study: Rudbar City

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Urban Planning, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

2 M.A Student of Urban Planning - Urban Planning, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

10.22034/jsc.2021.229769.1241

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Due to the unexpected nature of accidents and the need to make the right decisions and take appropriate action to reduce vulnerability, increase safety and resilience of settlements; management and planning are essential. In the meantime, land-use planning has a high potential in improving the conditions of human settlements and increasing the resilience of cities against risks. Land-use planning is a key to reduce risks according to the dimensions of spatial structure and the impact of its analytical tools and policies on the intensity and type of development. Unfavorable situation of physical elements and inappropriate use of urban lands, inadequate urban communication network, high urban densities, situation of infrastructure installations and inefficient distribution of urban spaces play an essential role in increasing the rate of urban damage. Because land-use planning, which is based on foresight, risk-taking, and decision-making and based on preventive measures, focuses on changing the vulnerabilities of cities, thereby reducing the impact of disasters and preventing them. On the other hand, recognizing resilience can help determine the traits and characteristics that increase the capacity of communities to deal with disasters and suggest tools to help the process of reducing vulnerability. Therefore, it can be said that if land-use planning and recognition of resilience is done properly, disaster risk for cities can be promising. In fact, the purpose of this study is to apply land-use planning policies in order to optimize and use the capabilities and resilience of the city against natural hazards. Accordingly, the main question of the research is as follow:
-Which of the land-use planning policies are effective on reducing natural hazards and promoting urban resilience?
 
Methodology
The present research is applied in terms of purpose and is descriptive-analytical in aspect of method. The purpose of this study is to apply land-use planning policies in order to optimize and use the capabilities and resilience of the city against natural hazards. Data were collected through documentary-library studies and questionnaire tool. The statistical population of the study was citizens living in Rudbar city which 384 samples have been calculated by using of the Cochran's formula. Convergence validity of the extracted mean variance (AVE) should be higher than 0.5 and the reliability of the questionnaire was calculated by Cronbach's alpha test of 0.915. SPSS and Smart-PLS software programs were exerted to analyze the statistical data of the questionnaires to prepare models between the dimensions of land-use planning policies and urban resilience. The land-use planning policies in the research have a multidimensional structure that includes: physical, social, economic and environmental policies.
 
Results and Discussion
Regression analysis showed a significant difference. The land-use policy variable has 68% ability to estimate the improvement of the institutional index, 61% economic, 57% physical and 55% urban resilience dimensions. Also, the beta coefficient of the variables is from the highest to the lowest. Institutional 0.826, physical 0.761 and social 0.724, these positive coefficients show that if a standard deviation from the variable of physical land use policy in Rudbar increases, the amount of housing diversity according to the implementation of housing policy between vertical and horizontal development will be different. Technology is on the rise in the city. The physical policy of maintaining a balance between vertical and horizontal development will also apply, as well as housing diversity in terms of resilience in the city. Accordingly, environmental policy to prevent land degradation of the existing transportation network in the city can increase service responsiveness as well as the usability of existing land.
 
Conclusion
What a city does before a hazard determines what happens after it, so the amount of casualties and damage from natural disasters depends on how well the local community is prepared for the event. Inadequate physical condition of the city, such as improper distribution and shortage of public open spaces, inefficient and inadequate road network, increased urban density, dilapidated and vulnerable buildings have a significant impact on the amount of damage caused by earthquakes and natural disasters and increase the city's recovery time. Examination of research criteria in the city of Rudbar, indicates the unsatisfactory situation of most criteria in the city. These issues indicate further damage to these areas in the event of earthquakes and natural disasters; therefore, this area is one of the priorities for action in the city and the preparation of plans to reduce the risk in these areas is very necessary. With the development of the city to the surrounding area, manifestations of urban planning and land use planning (narrow streets, better distribution and increase the extend of open spaces as a result of more access to open spaces, etc.) in the urban texture are visible. Finally, by comparing some of the indicators of urban resilience with the dimensions of land use policies, it was determined that if the land-use policies in Rudbar city are implemented according to the prepared plans, the resilience indicators of Rudbar city can also be improved. It seems that urban management and planning in this sector has remained at the level of plans and has only paid attention to factors such as suitable climate, ease of sewage disposal, the presence of barren land, etc. in the development of the city and ignores the infrastructure of future development of Rudbar city. It can be said that the nature of earthquakes and natural disasters in comparison with other risks and economic, social and political considerations cause the local government to refrain from this action despite its ability to prevent risky development and improve the quality of it.

Keywords


  1. احمدی، عبدالمجید و فتحی، سعید و اکبری، ابراهیم (1397) ارزیابی تاب‌آوری محیط شهری در برابر مخاطرات طبیعی با تأکید بر زمین‌لرزه با استفاده از منطق فازی و (GIS مطالعه موردی: شهر ارومیه)، جغرافیا و مخاطرات محیطی، دوره7. شماره 3، صص.73-57.
  2. حاتمی، یاسر و ذاکر حقیقی، کیانوش (1399) ارزیابی مؤلفه‌های تاب‌آوری شهری در مفهوم و رویکرد گذار مطالعه موردی: منطقه یک شهر همدان، جغرافیا و توسعه، دوره18، شماره 85، صص.174-155.
  3. نامجویان، فرخ؛ رضویان، محمدتقی؛ سرور، رحیم (1396) تاب‌آوری شهری چارچوبی الزام‌آور برای مدیریت آینده شهرها، جغرافیایی سرزمین، سال 14، شماره 55، صص. 95-81.
  4. داداش‌پور، هاشم و عادلی، زینب (1394) سنجش ظرفیت‌های تاب‌آوری در مجموعه شهری قزوین، مدیریت بحران، دوره4، شماره 2، صص.84-73.
  5. کتابچی، عماد و رسائی‌پور، مریم (1397) تاب‌آوری شهری: ارائه مدلی مفهومی از برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری، معماری شناسی، سال 1، شماره 1، صص.10-1.
  6. امیری، معصومه؛ مجتبی‌زاده خانقاهی، حسین؛ زیاری، یوسفعلی؛ نوری کرمانی، علی (1398) الگوی تصمیم‌گیری سیاست‌های زمین شهری در توسعه فیزیکی شهر ساری، نشریه تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی، سال 19، شماره 54، صص.146-125.
  7. بهزادافشار، کتایون و اکبری، پرویز (1398) تبیین و تحلیل معیارهای کاربری برنامه‌ریزی زمین در کاهش خطر زلزله جهت افزایش تاب‌آوری شهری (نمونه موردی: شهر سنندج)، فصلنامه نگرش‌های نو در جغرافیای انسانی، سال 11، شماره 2، صص 357-342.
  8. سلمانی‌مقدم، محمد؛ امیراحمدی، ابوالقاسم؛ کاویان، فرزانه (1393) کاربرد برنامه‌ریزی کاربری اراضی در افزایش تاب‌آوری شهری در برابر زمین‌لرزه با استفاده از سیستم اطلاعات جغرافیایی GIS (مطالعه موردی: شهر سبزوار)، مطالعات جغرافیایی مناطق خشک، سال 5، شماره 17، صص. 34-17.
  9. عزیزی، محمدمهدی و قرائی، آزاده (1394) برنامه‌ریزی کاربری زمین در راستای توسعه پایدار محله‌ای با تأکید بر بهینه‌سازی مصرف انرژی (مطالعه موردی: محله دروس، تهران)، هویت شهر، شماره 22، سال 9، صص. 18-5.
  10. محمدی سرین دیزج، مهدی و احدنژادرشتی، محسن (1395) ارزیابی میزان تاب‌آوری کالبدی شهری در برابر مخاطره زلزله موردمطالعه: شهر زنجان، نشریه تحلیل فضایی مخاطرات محیطی، سال 3، شماره 1، صص. 114-103.
  11. Ahern, J. (2013) Urban landscape sustainability and resilience: The promise and challenges of integrating ecology with urban planning and design, Landscape Ecology,Vol. 28, No.6, pp.1–9.
  12. Ahern, J. F. (2011) From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world, Landscape Architecture & Regional Planning Studio and Student Research and Creative Activity, Vol.28, No.8, pp.1–10.
  13. Ariti, A.T. & Vliet, J.V. & Verburg, P.H. (2019) The role of institutional actors and their interactions in the land use policy making process in Ethiopia, Journal of Environmental Management, No.237, pp.235-246.
  14. Aynekulu, E. & Wubeneh, W. & Birhane, E. & Begashaw, N. (2006) Monitoring and evaluating land use/land cover change using participatory geographic information system (PGIS) tools: a case study of begasheka watershed, tigray, Ethiopia, Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol.25, No.3, pp.1–10.
  15. Belachew, M. & Aytenfisu, S. (2010) Facing the Challenges in Building Sustainable Land Administration Capacity in Ethiopia. FIG Congress. Facing the Challenges– Building the Capacity Sydney, Australia. pp. 11–16.
  16. Berke, Ph. & Smith, G. (2006) Hazard Mitigation, Planning, and Disaster Resiliency: Challenges and Strategic Choices for the 21st Century‚ In Sustainable Development and Disaster Resiliency, The Netherlands: IOS Press, Amersterdam, pp. 1-21.
  17. Brodnig, G. & Mayer-Schönberger, V. (2000) Bridging the gap: the role of spatial information technologies in the integration of traditional environmental knowledge and western science, Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol.1, No.1, pp.1–15.
  18. Brown, K. (2014) Global environmental change I: A social turn for resilience?, Progress in Human Geography, Vol.38, No.1, pp.107–117.
  19. Davoudi, S. (2012) Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end?, Planning Theory & Practice, Vol.13,No.2, pp.299–307.
  20. Dutta‚ V. (2012) War on the Dream‚ How Land use Dynamics and Peri-urban Growth Characteristics of a Sprawling City Devour the Master Plan and Urban Suitability‚A Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making Approach‚ proceeded In 13th Global Development Conference “Urbanisation and Development: Delving Deeper into the Nexus” ‚ Budapest‚hungary.
  21. Folke, C. (2006) Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses, Global Environmental Change, Vol.16,No.3, pp.253–267.
  22. Jha, K. & Miner‚ W. & Geddes‚ S. (2012) Building urban resilience: principles, tools, and practice‚ The world Bank‚ pp. 155.
  23. Lebel, L. & Anderies, J. M. & Campbell, B. & Folke, C. & Hatfield-Dodds, S. & Hughes, T. P., et al. (2006) Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems, Ecology and Society, Vol.11,No.1, pp.19–40.
  24. Leichenko, R. (2011) Climate change and urban resilience. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol.3,No.3, pp.164–168.
  25. León‚ J. & March‚ A. (2014) Urban morphology as a tool for supporting tsunami rapid resilience: A case study of Talcahuano, Chile‚ Habitat International‚ Vol.43, pp. 250–262.
  26. Li, Y. & Gao, J. & Xu, T. (2019) Machine learning-assisted evaluation of land use policies and plans in a rapidly urbanizing district in Chongqing, China, Land Use Policy, Vol.87, pp.1-10.
  27. Meerow, S. & Newell, J. P. & Stults, M. (2016) Defining urban resilience: A review, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol.147,No.3, pp.38–49.
  28. Pelling, M. (2010). Adaptation to climate Change: From resilience to transformation. London;; New York: Routledge.
  29. Plummer, R. & Armitage, D. (2007) A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive Co-Management: Linking ecology, economics and society in a complex Ecological Economics, Vol.61, No.1, pp.62–74.
  30. (2009) UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction ‚unisdr press‚ Geneva‚ pp.30.
  31. Vale, L. J. (2014) The politics of resilient Cities: Whose resilience and whose city?, Building Research & Information, Vol.42,No.2, pp.191–201.
  32. Walker, J. & Cooper, M. (2011) Genealogies of resilience from systems ecology to the political economy of crisis adaptation, Security Dialogue, Vol.42, No.2, pp.143–160.
  33. Ahmadi, A. & Fathi, S. & Akbbari, E. (2019) Assessment of Urban Resilience against Natural Hazards with an Emphasis on Earthquake and Using Fuzzy Logic and GIS (A Case Study of Urmia City), Journal of Geography and Environmental Hazards, Vol.7, No.3, pp.57-73. [In Persian].
  34. Hatami, Y. & Zakerhaghighi, K. (2020) Evaluation of Urban Resiliency Components in Concept and Transition Approach Case study (one district of Hamedan), Geography and Development Iranian Journal, Vol.18, No.58, pp.155-174. [In Persian].
  35. Namjooyan, F. & Razavian, M. & Sarvar, R. (2017) urban resilience, the frame work for urban future management, Territory, Vol. 14, No.55, pp.81-95. [In Persian].
  36. Dadashpoor, H. & Adeli, Z. (2016) Measuring the Amount of Regional Resilience in Qazvin Urban Region, Journal Emergency Management, Vol.4,No.2, pp.73-84. [In Persian].
  37. Ketabchi, E. & Resaeipour, M. (2018) Urban resilience: presenting a conceptual model of urban planning and management, Architecture, Vol,1. No.1, pp.1-10.
  38. Amiribesheli, M. & Mogtabazadekhanghahi, H. & Ziari, Y. & Nourikermani, A. (2019) Pattern of decision making of urban land policies in the physical development (case study: SARI). Researches in Geographical Sciences, Vol.19, No.54, pp.125-146. [In Persian].
  39. BehzadAfshar, K. & Akbari, P. (2019) Explaining and analyzing land use planning criteria in reducing earthquake risk to increase urban resilience (Case study: Sanandaj), Geography Journal, Vol.11, No.2, pp. 341-357. [In Persian].
  40. SalmaniMoghadam, M. & Amirahmadi, A. & Kaviyan, F. (2014) Investigating the Role of Land Use Planning in Improving Seismic Resilience of Urban Communities (Case Study of Sabzevar), Journal of Arid Region Geographic Studies, Vol.5, No.17, pp. 17-34. ([In Persian].
  41. Azizi, M. & Gharaei, A. (2015) Land Use Planning Considering Sustainable Neighborhood Development, with Emphasis on Energy Efficiency (Case Study: Daroos, Tehran), Hoviatshahr, Vol.9,No.22, pp.5-18. [In Persian].
  42. Mohammadi sarin dizaj, M. & Ahadnejad roshti, M. (2016) The evaluation of the urban fabric resiliency against earthquake risk Case Study: Zanjan, Spatial analysis of environmental hazards, Vol.3,No.1, pp.103-114. [In Persian].