Persian
Language
Geographical Research is Published in Persian Fulltext.
Volume 39, Issue 3 (2024)
GeoRes 2024, 39(3): 339-345 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2024/08/7 | Accepted: 2024/09/22 | Published: 2024/09/30
Received: 2024/08/7 | Accepted: 2024/09/22 | Published: 2024/09/30
How to cite this article
Mahdavi Heris M, Shariatpanahi M, Daniali T, Armaghan S, Sistanipour A. Influential Factors in the Formation of the Physical Structure of Villages in Shemiranat County. GeoRes 2024; 39 (3) :339-345
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1642-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1642-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Department of Geography, Yadegar-e-eImam Khomeini (RAH), Shahre Rey Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract (756 Views)
Aims: This study aimed to investigate the factors shaping the physical development of villages in Shemiranat County.
Methodology: Conducted in 2024, the research focused on villages in Shemiranat County, specifically in the Rudbar Qasran rural district, selected through cluster sampling. Seven villages—Niknam Deh, Ab Nik, Aminabad, Igel, Garmabdar, Bagh Gol, and Bayer—were chosen for the study. A questionnaire was designed based on 8 primary indicators and 45 sub-indicators, resulting in 45 questions, each rated on a 4-point Likert scale. The questionnaire's validity was established through expert review, involving 17 university professors and specialists. Two target groups were surveyed: rural planning experts (n=22) and village residents. The statistical population comprised 2,399 individuals, from which 318 participants were selected using Cochran's formula. Data analysis employed the Shannon entropy method and paired t-tests.
Findings: The study examined five key indicators: environmental-physical, economic, socio-cultural, and political-managerial, alongside 45 sub-indicators. Both experts and residents identified access to financial resources, infrastructure development, and housing quality as the most critical factors. Although there were some differences in perception between experts and residents regarding specific indicators, there was significant overlap in their views. Economic and environmental factors were found to have the greatest influence on the villages' physical structure, with access to financial resources, infrastructure, climate conditions, and water and soil resources emerging as the most crucial elements. Indicators related to historical buildings and cultural aspects were ranked lowest in the cultural category.
Conclusion: Both experts and residents identified economic and environmental factors as the most influential drivers of physical development in the studied villages.
Methodology: Conducted in 2024, the research focused on villages in Shemiranat County, specifically in the Rudbar Qasran rural district, selected through cluster sampling. Seven villages—Niknam Deh, Ab Nik, Aminabad, Igel, Garmabdar, Bagh Gol, and Bayer—were chosen for the study. A questionnaire was designed based on 8 primary indicators and 45 sub-indicators, resulting in 45 questions, each rated on a 4-point Likert scale. The questionnaire's validity was established through expert review, involving 17 university professors and specialists. Two target groups were surveyed: rural planning experts (n=22) and village residents. The statistical population comprised 2,399 individuals, from which 318 participants were selected using Cochran's formula. Data analysis employed the Shannon entropy method and paired t-tests.
Findings: The study examined five key indicators: environmental-physical, economic, socio-cultural, and political-managerial, alongside 45 sub-indicators. Both experts and residents identified access to financial resources, infrastructure development, and housing quality as the most critical factors. Although there were some differences in perception between experts and residents regarding specific indicators, there was significant overlap in their views. Economic and environmental factors were found to have the greatest influence on the villages' physical structure, with access to financial resources, infrastructure, climate conditions, and water and soil resources emerging as the most crucial elements. Indicators related to historical buildings and cultural aspects were ranked lowest in the cultural category.
Conclusion: Both experts and residents identified economic and environmental factors as the most influential drivers of physical development in the studied villages.
Keywords:
References
1. Ahmadian R, Mohammadi Makerani H, Mousavi S (2008). Features of the shape of the fabric of rural Iran. ABADI. (59):16-23. [Persian] [Link]
2. Alalhesabi M (2011). Participatory rural planning empirical study on the role of villagers in planning rural development. Housing & Rural Environment. 30(134):35-48. [Persian] [Link]
3. Gaisin IT, Gaisin RI, Biktimirov NM (2015). The factors affecting pattern of rural settlement of the republic of Tatarstan. Asian Social Science. 11(11):228-232. [Link] [DOI:10.5539/ass.v11n11p228]
4. Ghorbani F, Heidarnattag V (2017). Investigating the role of climatic factors in the formation of rural texture and housing in a temperate and humid climate (case example of Diva Babol village). Proceedings of the Research Conference Architecture and Urbanism Islamic History of Iran. Shiraz: Civilica. [Persian] [Link]
5. Hamerow H (2012). Rural settlements and society in Anglo-Saxon England. London: Oxford University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203253.001.0001]
6. Janečková Molnárová K, Skřivanová Z, Kalivoda O (2017). Rural identity and landscape aesthetics in exurbia: Some issues to resolve from a Central European perspective. Moravian Geographical Reports. 25(1):2-12. [Link] [DOI:10.1515/mgr-2017-0001]
7. Javanshiri M, Anabestani A, Sojasi Gheidari H (2020). Investigating the factors affecting the physical-spatial changes in rural settlements of Mashhad urban complex. Geography & Urban Space Development. 6(2):17-47. [Persian] [Link]
8. Khakpour M, Eshghi Sanati H (2014). An investigation of the effect of social and cultural factors on the skeletal texture of Gilan provinces villages. Housing and Rural Environment. 33(148):3-20. [Persian] [Link]
9. Long HL, Liu YS, Wu X, Dong G (2009). Spatio-temporal dynamic patterns of farmland and rural settlements in Su-Xi-Chang region: Implications for building a new countryside in coastal China. Land Use Policy. 26(2):322-333. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.04.001]
10. Mehdinezhad J, Sharghi A, Asadpour F (2019). The effects of economic factors on the physical structure of sustainable rural housing. Proceedings of the 4th National Conference on Architecture and Sustainable Cities. Tehran: Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University. [Persian] [Link]
11. Rahmani B, Shafie Sabet N, Mazarzehi Y (2019). The role of spatial flows in the economic developments of rural settlements, case: Peripheral villages of Zahedan city. Journal of Space Economy & Rural Development. 8(29):33-50. [Persian] [Link]
12. Ren Y, Qian X, Xuanfang X, Yanchun C (2019). Rural settlement spatial patterns and effects: Road traffic accessibility and geographic factors in Guangdong Province, China. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 29(2):213-230. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11442-019-1593-2]
13. Schwarz K (2015). Censer fragmentation and life history: Rural domestic settlement enchainment and accumulation activities and the classic-postclassic transition of the Petén Lakes region, Guatemala. Geophysical Research Letters. 33(1):89-90. [Link]
14. Sojasi Qeydari H, Esfaram Y (2018). Analysis local management role in reducing the physical vulnerability approach to good governance (case study: Bahmaei Sarahdi Garbi rural district). Rural Development Strategies. 4(3):405-426. [Persian] [Link]
15. Tian G, Qiao Z, Gao X (2014). Rural settlement land dynamic modes and policy implications in Beijing metropolitan region, China. Habitat International. 44:237-246. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.06.010]
16. Woods M (2007). Engaging the global countryside: Globalization, hybridity and the reconstitution of rural place. Progress in Human Geography. 31(4):485-507. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/0309132507079503]
17. Xi J, Wang X, Kong Q, Zhang N (2015). Spatial morphology evolution of rural settlements induced by tourism. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 25(4):497-511. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11442-015-1182-y]
18. Yang R, Liu Y, Long H, Qiao L (2015). Spatio-temporal characteristics of rural settlements and land use in the Bohai Rim of China. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 25(5):559-572. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11442-015-1187-6]
19. Yang R, Xu Q, Long H (2016). Spatial distribution characteristics and optimized reconstruction analysis of China's rural settlements during the process of rapid urbanization. Journal of Rural Studies. 47(B):413-424. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.05.013]
20. Zhou G, He Y, Tang C, Yu T, Xiao G, Zhong T (2013). Dynamic mechanism and present situation of rural settlements evolution in China. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 23(3):513-524. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11442-013-1025-7]
21. Zhu J, Xu W, Xiao Y, Shi J, Hu X, Yan B (2023). Temporal and spatial patterns of traditional village distribution evolution in Xiangxi, China: Identifying multidimensional influential factors and conservation significance. Heritage Science. 11(1):261. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40494-023-01110-3]