زمان پاسخگویی تنها روزهای زوج ساعت 10 الی 12  

   [Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Volume 34, Issue 2 (2019) ::
geores 2019, 34(2): 213-221 Back to browse issues page
Conceptualization of the Dimensions of Environmental Quality in Rural Planning by Participation of Local People and Experts; a Case Study of Shahriar Village, Lordegan County, Iran
Kazem Rostami1, Mehdi Pourtaheri *2, Abdolreza Roknaldin Eftekhari1
1- Department of Geography & Rural Planning, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran, Geography and Rural Planning, Tarbiat Modares University
2- Department of Geography & Rural Planning, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran , mehdipourtaher@gmail.com
Abstract:   (628 Views)
Aims & Backgrounds: with the start of planning in the new form in rural areas, a conflict was created between the demands of villagers from below with the view of planners from the above.  The lack of normative view and pay a little attention to the environmental quality of development have an important role in the expansion of the conflict. The aim of the study was to the conceptualization of environmental quality dimensions in rural planning by the participation of local people and experts.
Methodology: In this qualitative study, Sharyar village was selected from the Lordegan county to attract the participation of people in the process of conceptualizing the environmental quality dimensions and optimal planning. The main reason for selecting the Shahryar village as a case study in this research was executing various plans or implementation of many projects in the form of rural planning. 36 aware people, local managers and experts of the shahryar village were organized in the 6 workshops and expectations of the subjects from the concepts of environmental quality in rural planning were determined in the various items.
Findings: 202 of the items of environmental quality concepts were collected and the items were ranked by the workgroups in the framework of 5 dimensions, 1 domain, and 44 indexes. 48 items in the form of 9 indicators in physical dimension, 46 items in the form of 10 indicators in social-cultural dimension, 42 items in the form of 8 indicators in economical dimension, 35 items in the form of 8 indicators in the environmental dimension, and 10 items in the form of 3 indicators in the political-administrative dimension were arranged.
Conclusion: The five dimensions in the strategic territory template with 21 items and 6 indexes including the capacity, perceived justice, considering the planning, tourist attraction, and dynamism and prioritizing the country's planning system are proposed for evaluating the quality of the rural environment.
Keywords: Environmental Quality, Rural Participation, Environmental Quality Dimension, Rural Planning, Shahryar Village
Full-Text [PDF 946 kb]   (82 Downloads)    
Article Type: Descriptive & Survey | Subject: Rural Planning
Received: 2018/04/8 | Accepted: 2019/04/20 | Published: 2019/06/3
* Corresponding Author Address: Geography and Rural Planning, Tarbiat Modares University
References
1. Arnstein ShR (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association. 35(4):216-224. [DOI:10.1080/01944366908977225]
2. Akbarian Ronizi SR, Shaykh-Baygloo R (2015). Assessment of environment quality of villages tourism case: Asara county. Rural Research. 6(2):433-457. [Persian]
3. Barati N, Kakavand E (2013). Comparative evaluation of the environmental quality of residential place with an emphasis on citizens image (Case study: Qazvin city). Honar- Ha-Ye-Ziba. 18(3):25-32. [Persian]
4. Barati N, Soleimannejad MA (2011). Perception of stimuli in controlled environment and gender impact on it case study: Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism Students at the International University of Imam Khomaini, Qazvin, Iran. Bagh-e Nazar. 8(17):19-30. [Persian]
5. Barrow CJ (2006). Environmental management for sustainable development. New York: Routledge Publication. [DOI:10.4324/9780203016671]
6. Brown AL (2003). Increasing the utility of urban environmental quality information. Landscape and Urban Planning. 65(1-2):85-93. [DOI:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00240-2]
7. Drazkiewicz A, Challies E, Newig J (2015). Public participation and local environmental planning: Testing factors influencing decision quality and implementation in four case studies from Germany. Land Use Policy. 46:211-222. [DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.02.010]
8. Kerselaers E, Rogge E, Vanempten E, Lauwers L, Van G (2013). Changing land use in the countryside: Takeholders perception of the ongoing rural planning processes in Flanders. Land Use Policy. 32:197-206. [DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.10.016]
9. Kinsella J, Goetz SJ, Partridge MD, Deller SC, Fleming D (2010). Evaluating RD Policies for social and human capital development. Eurochoices. 9(1):42-47. [DOI:10.1111/j.1746-692X.2010.00151.x]
10. Latifi A, Sajjadzadeh H (2015). Evaluation of the effect of environmental quality components on behavioral patterns in urban parks, case study: Hamedan People's Park. Urban Studies. 3(11):3-18. [Persian]
11. Litman T (2013). Planning principles and practices. Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
12. Marans R (2003). Understanding environmental quality through quality of life studies: The 2001 DAS and its use of subjective and objective indicators 1. Landscape and Urban Planning. 65(1-2):73-83. [DOI:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00239-6]
13. Mortazavi S (2001). Psychology of the environment and its application. 1st Edition. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press. [Persian]
14. Motalebi G (2001). Environmental psychology, new knowledge in the service of architecture and urban design. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba. 10(0):52-60. [Persian]
15. Moser G (2009). Quality of life and sustainability: Toward person-environment congruity. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 29:351-357. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.02.002]
16. OECD (2006). The new rural paradigm: Policies and governance. Paris: OECD Publication. [DOI:10.1787/9789264023918-en]
17. Faircheallaigh C (2010). Public participation and environmental impact assessment: Purposes, implications, and lessons for public policy making. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 30(1):19-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.eiar.2009.05.001]
18. Ossoli SH, Fahimi AH, Shahriari H, Jafari SM, Shirazimanesh M (2015). Integrated quality management: Strategic and cultural tools. Tehran: Resa. [Persian]
19. Pakzad J, Saki E (2014). Aesthetic experience of built environment. Honar- Ha-Ye-Ziba. 19(3):5-14. [Persian]
20. Panahi B (2008). Trust and trust in organization. Peyk Noor. 7(4):88-103. [Persian]
21. Pintea MO (2015). The relationship between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. Review of Economic Studies and Research Virgil Madgearu. 18(1):91-108.
22. Porteous JD (1971). Design with people - the quality of the urban environment, environmental and behavior. Environment and Behavior. 3:155-178. [DOI:10.1177/001391657100300204]
23. Prager K, Nienaber B, Phillips A, Neumann B (2015). How rural policy should be evaluated if it aims to foster community involvement in environmental management. Rural Studies. 37:120-131. [DOI:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.12.006]
24. Rafiean M, Taghvaei A, Khademi M, AliPoor R (2013). Comparative Study of quality measurement approaches in designing urban public spaces. Iranian Architecture and Urban Design. 3(4):35-43. [Persian]
25. Rahimi G (2006). Performance evaluation and continuous improvement of organizations. Tadbir Magazine. 173:41-45. [Persian]
26. Ramezani M, Livani M (2014). Identification of native landscape aesthetics patterns in Gilan based on rural landscape analysis (Case study: Post-Chopar village). City Landscape Research. 2:39-52. [Persian]
27. Salvia R, Quaranta G (2017). Place-based rural development and resilience: A lesson from a small community. Sustainability. 9(6):1-15. [DOI:10.3390/su9060889]
28. Sojjasi Gheidari H, Sadeghloo T, Mahdavi D (2014). Explaining the role of environmental quality rural tourism destinations to strengthen the mentally view of tourists (Case study: Tourist destinations of Rudbar, Ghasran). Spatial Planning. 19(2):61-88. [Persian]
29. Tabibian M, Mansouri Y (2013). Improving environmental quality and living satisfaction in new neighborhoods with prioritizing measures based on residents' opinions (Case study: Kashan). Environmentalology. 39(4):1-16. [Persian]
30. Taghvaei AA, Maroufi S, Pahlavan S (2012). Evaluation of the Impact of Urban Quality on the Social Relations of Citizens; Case Study: Abkouh Town, Mashhad City. Universe. 3(10):42-54. [Persian]
31. United Nations Environment Programme (2009). Geo Cities Manual Guidelines for Integrated Environmental Assessment of Urban Areas. New York: GEO Cities Adaptation for the Arab region.
32. van Kamp I, Leidelmeijer K, Marsman G, Hollander AD (2003). Urban environmental quality and human well-being towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study. Landscape and Urban Planning. 65(1-2):5-18. [DOI:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00232-3]
33. Zaynabadi M (2008). Theories and Theories of Social Trust in Society. Research Institute for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council, Department of Social and Cultural Research, Research No. 16; pp. 9-32. [Persian]
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

rostami K, Pourtaheri M, Eftekhari A R. Conceptualization of the Dimensions of Environmental Quality in Rural Planning by Participation of Local People and Experts; a Case Study of Shahriar Village, Lordegan County, Iran. geores. 2019; 34 (2) :213-221
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-391-en.html


Volume 34, Issue 2 (2019) Back to browse issues page
فصلنامه تحقیقات جغرافیایی Geographical Researches Quarterly Journal
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 31 queries by YEKTAWEB 3977