Urban Economics and Planning

Urban Economics and Planning

Spatial Analysis of the Distribution of Urban Parks and Green Spaces in Iranian Metropolises

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Mahmood Akbari
Assistant Professor of Geography and Urban Planning, Yasouj University, Yasouj, Iran
10.22034/uep.2023.411822.1396
Abstract
Introduction 
Proper access to urban parks and green spaces is an important criterion for measuring livability in cities. Urban green spaces and consequently urban parks have a great contribution to the health and well-being of citizens. Parks and urban green spaces are some of the most important elements of urban green infrastructure that help to increase the quality of life of citizens and improve the urban environment by purifying the air, controlling noise pollution, reducing the heat island effect, and preserving biodiversity. Urban parks provide ecological and cultural services such as sightseeing, aesthetics, recreation and entertainment, education and culture, sports, and social communication for urban residents and thus improve their quality of life. Urban parks and green spaces as a center for social interactions in today’s cities play a key role in urban renewal and sustainable urban and regional development. Proper access to urban parks and green spaces is related to the happiness of citizens. Considering the important functions of urban parks and green spaces and their role in achieving sustainable urban and regional development, the design and organization of these spaces in cities, especially in the metropolises of Iran, as a strategy to solve acute urban problems and rapid and indiscriminate urbanization and to increase the level of urban livability.
Materials and Methods
The present study was carried out with the aim of statistical analysis of the spatial distribution of urban parks and green spaces in the metropolises of Iran. For this reason, the spatial distribution of parks and urban green spaces in selected Iranian metropolises has been analyzed in this quantitative research using Critic and Cocoso techniques. The metropolises studied in this research were official and unofficial metropolises of Iran such as Tehran, Mashhad, Isfahan, Karaj, Shiraz, Tabriz, Ahvaz, Kermanshah, Rasht, Zahedan, Hamedan, and Kerman. The data needed to conduct the research has been collected from the statistics of the studied metropolises. The indicators used are the total area of urban green space in square meters, the area of green space covered by the municipality, the total number of parks, the total area of parks in square meters, the number of urban parks, the area of urban parks, the number of forest parks, and the area of forest parks and per capita green space in the studied metropolises of Iran. The weight of these indicators was calculated using the Critic technique and was used in the Cocoso technique. In the Cocoso technique, three strategies and the value of the final score (K) have been investigated and analyzed. 
Findings
In the first strategy (Ka), the Cocoso technique of Tehran metropolis has the highest score (0/114). In this strategy, the cities of Rasht (0/016) and Hamedan (0/071) have the lowest scores. In the second strategy (Kb), the Cocoso technique of Tehran metropolis obtained the highest score (426/23). In this strategy, the cities of Rasht with a score of (2), Zahedan with a score of (49/76), and Hamadan with a score of (61/47) obtained the lowest scores. In the third strategy (Kc), the Kokosu technique of Tehran metropolis has the highest score by scoring (1). In this strategy, the cities of Rasht with a score of (0/140) and Hamedan with a score of (0/619) have the lowest scores. The mean of the closest neighborhood of the spatial distribution of urban parks and green spaces in Shiraz metropolis is 0/721049, the Z score is -4/713088, and the PValue is 0/000002. Based on the average of the nearest neighborhood, the pattern of spatial distribution of urban parks and green spaces in Shiraz metropolis was clustered. Multi-distance spatial cluster analysis shows that the pattern of spatial distribution of parks and urban green spaces in Shiraz metropolis is clustered.
Conclusion
The results of the research show that Tehran metropolis had the highest number of parks and urban green spaces. Despite the fact that this national metropolis has obtained the highest number of parks and urban green spaces among the studied cities; considering the amount of population concentrated in this metropolis, this city is far from the ideal state. It is not possible to check the amount and level of urban livability only by using indicators related to the number of urban parks and green spaces, and many other factors influence the level of livability. After Tehran metropolis, Shiraz and Mashhad metropolises have many advantages in terms of parks and urban green spaces. Among the studied metropolises, Rasht city has obtained the weakest and lowest score and this city needs special attention in the field of studied indicators.
Keywords
Cocoso Technique
Critic Technique
Metropolises of Iran
Urban Park
Subjects
[1] Bahriny F. Bell S. Patterns of Urban Park Use and Their Relationship to Factors of Quality: A Case Study of Tehran, Iran, Sustainability, 2020, 12(4): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041560
[2] Zeng L. Liu C. Exploring Factors Affecting Urban Park Use from a Geospatial Perspective: A Big Data Study in Fuzhou, China, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2023, 20(5): 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph20054237
[3] Long Y. Qin J. Wu Y. Wang K. Analysis of Urban Park Accessibility Based on Space Syntax: Take the Urban Area of Changsha City as an Example. Land, 2023, 12, 1061. https://doi.org/10.3390/ land12051061
[4] Sheng Q. Wan D. Yu B. Effect of Space Configurational Attributes on Social Interactions in Urban Parks, Sustainability, 2021, 13(14): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13147805
[5] Xu Z. Gao X.  Wang Z. Fan J. Big Data-Based Evaluation of Urban Parks: A Chinese Case Study, Sustainability, 2019, 11(7), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11072125
[6] Bertram C. Meyerhoff J. Rehdanz K. Wüstemann H. Differences in the recreational value of urban parks between weekdays and weekends, A discrete choice analysis, Landscape and Urban Planning, 2017, 159, 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.006
[7] McCormack G. R. Rock M. Swanson K. Burton L. Massolo A. Physical activity patterns in urban neighborhood parks: Insights from a multiple case study, BMC Public Health, 2014, 14, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-962 
[8] Chen B. Adimo O. A. Bao Z. Assessment of aesthetic quality and multiple functions of urban green space from the users’ perspective: The case of Hangzhou Flower Garden, China, Landscape and Urban Planning, 2009, 93, 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.06.001
[9] Matsuoka R. H. Kaplan R. People needs in the urban landscape: Analysis of landscape and urban planning contributions, Landscape and Urban Planning, 2008, 84, 7–19. https://doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.09.009
[10] Enkhbold B. Matsui K. Community Perceptions about Participating in Urban Park Establishment in Ulaanbaatar City, Mongolia, Land, 2021, 10(11): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ land10111268
[11] Chu Y. T. Li D. Chang P. J. Effects of Urban Park Quality, Environmental Perception, and Leisure Activity on Well-Being among the Older Population, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021, 18(21): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph182111402
[12] Li Z. Liang Z. Feng L. Fan Z. beyond Accessibility: A Multidimensional Evaluation of Urban Park Equity in Yangzhou, China, ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 2022, 11(8): 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijgi11080429
[13] Van Dinter M. Kools M. Dane G. Weijs-Perrée M. Chamilothori K. Van Leeuwen E. Borgers A. Van den Berg P. Urban Green Parks for Long-Term Subjective Well-Being: Empirical Relationships between Personal Characteristics, Park Characteristics, Park Use, Sense of Place, and Satisfaction with Life in The Netherlands, Sustainability, 2022, 14(9): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14094911
[14] Dang Y. Wang C. Chen P. Identification and Optimization Strategy of Urban Park Service Areas Based on Accessibility by Public Transport: Beijing as a Case Study, Sustainability, 2022, 14(12): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127112
[15] Wu W. Ding K. Optimization Strategy for Parks and Green Spaces in Shenyang City: Improving the Supply Quality and Accessibility, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, 19(8): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084443
[16] Bao Y. Gao M. Luo D. Zhou X. Urban Parks—A Catalyst for Activities! The Effect of the Perceived Characteristics of the Urban Park Environment on Children’s Physical Activity Levels, Forests, 2023, 14(2): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14020423
[17] Zheng Y. Wang S. Zhu J. Huang S. Cheng L. Dong J. Sun Y. A Comprehensive Evaluation of Supply and Demand in Urban Parks along “Luck Greenway” in Fuzhou, Sustainability, 2023, 15(3): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032250
[18] Jun J. towards a Smarter Urban Park: Busan Citizens Park, Designs, 2023, 7(1): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs7010006
[19] Chen Q. Wang C. Lou G. Zhang M. Wu S. Measurement of Urban Park Accessibility from the Quasi-Public Goods Perspective, Sustainability, 2019, 11(17): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174573
[20] Gilchrist K. Brown C. Montarzino A. Workplace settings and wellbeing: Greenspace use and views contribute to employee wellbeing at peri-urban business sites, Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015, 138, 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.004
[21] White M. P. Elliott L. R. Gascon M. Roberts B. Fleming L. E. Blue space, health and well-being: A narrative overview and synthesis of potential benefits, Environmental Research, 2020, 191, 110169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110169
[22] Wojnowska-Heciak M. Suchocka M. Błaszczyk M. Muszynska M. Urban Parks as Perceived by City Residents with Mobility Difficulties: A Qualitative Study with In-Depth Interviews, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, 19(4): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph19042018
[23] Liu M. Chen C. Yan J. Identifying Park Spatial Characteristics That Encourage Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity among Park Visitors, Land, 2023, 12(3), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12030717
[24] Hu J. Wu J. Sun Y. Zhao X. Hu G. Spatiotemporal Influence of Urban Park Landscape Features on Visitor Behavior, Sustainability, 2023, 15(6): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065248
[25] Wesolowska J. Urban infrastructure facilities as an essential public investment for sustainable cities – indispensable but unwelcome objects of social conflicts Case study of Warsaw Poland, Transportation Research Procedia, 2016, 16, 553 – 565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.11.052
[26] Liu J. Han J. Does a Certain Rule Exist in the Long-Term Change of a City’s Livability? Evidence from New York, Tokyo, and Shanghai, Sustainability, 2017, 9(10): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101681
[27] Bibri S. E. Krogstie J. Smart sustainable cities of the future: An extensive interdisciplinary literature review, Sustainable Cities and Society, 2017, 31, 183–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.016
[28] Wei Y.G. Huang C. Lam P.T.I. Yuan Z. Sustainable urban development: A review on urban carrying capacity assessment, Habitat International, 2015, 46, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.10.015
[29] Yazdani M. Zarate P.  Zavadskas E. K. Turskis Z. A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems, Management Decision, 2018, 57(9), 1–20. https://10.1108/MD-05-2017-0458
[30] Mahdizadeh J. Evolution in the concept, role and structure of megacities, Urban Management Quarterly, 2013, 17, 18-31. [In Persian]

  • Receive Date 15 August 2023
  • Revise Date 07 September 2023
  • Accept Date 08 September 2023