Structural and functional improvement of urban fringe areas: toward achieving sustainable built–natural environment interactions

Abstract

Applying ecological approach in the planning and design of urban fringe areas has gained significant attention in the current decade, and a myriad of research has been conducted using these principals. However, integrating these principles with socioeconomic criteria has been discussed loosely. This could be due to two different realms of thinking which are associated with disciplines of ecology and social-economical sciences making a successful coexistence between these them quite challenging. The purpose of this paper is to achieve sustainable built-natural environment interactions in urban fringe areas by taking socioeconomic factors along with ecological principles into account. In this study, change detection analysis from 1994 to 2016 is conducted to show the trend of urban construction and the natural environment's reaction to urban expansion. The structural elements of the urban fringe area including river systems, green patches, and landform are extracted to analyze their behavior in interaction with urban construction through looking at all segmentations of each element's continuity from north to south. Socioeconomic factors influencing these changes are also discussed and analyzed. The results show broad changes between the southern and northern parts in terms of the continuity and function of structural elements. Finally, considering structural and functional improvement potentials and restrictions, short-term and long-term strategies for rehabilitation and improvement of the structure and function of the urban fringe areas are provided.

Spatial development planning in peri-urban space of Burdwan City, West Bengal, India: statutory infrastructure as mediating factors

“…The main purposes of development planning indicators are identification and analysis of relevant issues, setting priorities according to objectives, and directing to evaluation of the development plan [50]. Some studies also suggest that there is close association between sustainable development and socio-economic components along with environmental issues [51]. Spatial planners and policy makers at present struggle to comprehend the peri-urban territory, with its blend of land uses and its transitional status between the urban and the provincial [52,53].…”

Remote sensing and spatial databases for investigating latent urban-rural dynamics in rural, inland districts of Southern Italy

“…In addition, a tendential contraction of agricultural areas has been recorded since the 1960s (Congedo et al, 2017) which testifies how the natural capital of Italy is progressively decreasing, with consequent negative impacts on the quality of environment and landscape (e.g., land degradation, see Salvati et al, 2012;Recanatesi et al, 2016;Imbrenda et al, 2022;Lanfredi et al, 2022;Rodrigo-Comino et al 2022;Nickayin et al, 2022) and in terms of socio-economic disparities (Salvati and Zitti, 2007;Salvati and Zitti, 2009). These impacts generally affect the urban-rural fringe in the world, which is among the most ecologically vulnerable areas due to its peculiarities of transition space (Goodarzi et al, 2019;Coluzzi et al, 2022;Zambon et al, 2017).…”

Planning and optimization of green infrastructures for stormwater management: The case of Tehran West Bus Terminal

“…Apart from the hydrological benefits of GI‐BMP, these natural‐inspired practices have several socioeconomic, and environmental benefits. Research indicated that GI‐BMP enhances the quality of education (Kevern, 2011), beautifies landscapes (Goodarzi et al, 2019; Saeedi & Darabi, 2019), and reduces the operational and maintain costs of urban landscape (Saeedi & Goodarzi, 2020). Environmentally, GI‐BMP's benefits consists of enhancing water quality (Jia et al, 2012; Urbonas, 2003; York et al, 2015), diminishing air pollution (Jayasooriya et al, 2017; Rafael et al, 2018), and enhancing biodiversity (Capotorti et al, 2019).…”