Volume 23, Issue 69 (6-2023)                   jgs 2023, 23(69): 299-322 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abdehkolahchi M, Ghalehnoee A. (2023). Explaining the Factors Affecting the Distribution of Land Use Change Interests Using the Communicative Planning Framework. jgs. 23(69), : 16 doi:10.61186/jgs.23.69.299
URL: http://jgs.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3680-en.html
Explaining the Factors Affecting the Distribution of Land Use Change Interests Using the Communicative Planning Framework
Mohsen Abdehkolahchi1 , Abdehkolahchi Ghalehnoee * 2
1- Art University of Isfahan, av. Hakim Nezami, Khaqani Crossroad
2- Associate Professor, Art University of Isfahan, av. Hakim Nezami, Khaqani Crossroad , m.ghalehnoee@aui.ac.ir
Abstract:   (4708 Views)
Urban land use change is one of the key issues in urban planning that has been addressed by researchers in many different aspects, especially from the perspective of space. But the point that has been overlooked in various studies is that the analysis of different aspects of land use change is not limited to classical and spatial factors, and because of the various interest of land use change, many stakeholders aim to derive interest from this process in urban land developments. Accordingly, this paper aims to apply the communicative planning framework in identifying and explaining the factors affecting the distribution of land use change interests, because communicative planning as one of the major urban planning theories has focused on proper distribution of interests among stakeholders. In this study, after formulating the study results from theoretical studies, using a quantitative approach and exploratory factor analysis technique, the factors affecting the distribution of land use change interests have been identified and explained based on Approvals of the Commission Article 5 of the Ahvaz City (as one of the official references to land use change in the urban planning system). The results show that 9 factors with cumulative variance of 70/851% provide a proper explanation of user change interests distribution, among which "mediation legitimacy of planners and decision makers" has the most effect. Of course, the quality of these factors with 42.31% of the land quality shows the distribution of land use interests among the stakeholders was not very appropriate, which can lead to interest conflicts, especially between groups with economical-political interests and the public interest, and thus cause social instability in Ahvaz city.
Article number: 16
Keywords: Land Use Change, Interests Distribution, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Ahwaz City
Full-Text [PDF 716 kb]   (885 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Geography and Urban Planning
References
1. اجلالی، پرویز و رفیعیان، مجتبی و عسگری، علی (1392)، نظریه برنامه ریزی: دیدگاه های سنتی و جدید، نشر آگه، تهران.
2. زبردست، اسفندیار (1396)، کاربرد روش تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی (EFA) در برنامه ریزی شهری و منطقه ای؛ مورد پژوهی: سنجش وضعیت پایداری اجتماعی در کلانشهر تهران، نشریه هنرهای زیبا ـ معماری و شهرسازی، دوره 22، شماره 2، صص 5 تا 18.
3. طرهانی، حسین و پروین پرتوی (1396)، تحلیل منفعت عمومی در نظریه برنامه ریزی ارتباطی، کنگره بین-المللی مطالعات میان رشته ای در علوم پایه و مهندسی، تهران.
4. هاروی، دیوید (1392)، شهری شدن سرمایه؛ چرحه دوم انباشت سرمایه در تولید محیط مصنوع، ترجمه عارف اقوامی مقدم، چاپ دوم، نشر دات، تهران.
5. Alexander, E.R., (2000), Rationality revisited: planning paradigms in a post-postmodernist perspective, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 19, 242-256. [DOI:10.1177/0739456X0001900303]
6. Braimoh, A. K. and Onishi, T. (2007) Spatial determinants of urban land use change in Lagos, Nigeria, Land Use Policy, 24(2), pp. 502-515. [DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2006.09.001]
7. Beavers, A. S; Lounsbury, J. W; Richards, J. K; Huck, S. W; Skolits, G. J & Esquivel, S. L (2013), Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, Vol., 18, No 6, pp. 1-13.
8. Blokhuis, E.G.J., Snijders, C.C.P., Han, Q. and Schaefer, W.F. (2012), Conflicts and cooperation in brownfield redevelopment projects: application of conjoint analysis and game theory to model strategic decisionmaking, Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 138 No. 3, pp. 195-205. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000122]
9. Brown, G., Raymond, C., (2013), Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landscape and Urban Planning. submitted for publication. [DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.007]
10. Campbell, S., (1996). Green cities, growing cities, just cities? Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 62 (3), 296-312 [DOI:10.1080/01944369608975696]
11. Campbell, D. J., Gichohi, H., Mwangi, A., and Chege, L. (2000). Land Use Conflict in S. E. Kajiado District, Kenya. Land Use Policy, 17(4), 337-348. [DOI:10.1016/S0264-8377(00)00038-7]
12. Campbell, H., Marshall, R. (2002), Utilitarianism's Bad Breath? A Re-evaluation of Public Interest Justification for Planning, London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi, 1(2), 163-187. [DOI:10.1177/147309520200100205]
13. Cullingworth JB, V. Town and country planning in the UK. London: Routledge; 2002. [DOI:10.4324/9780203462560]
14. Dawkins, C. J. (2000), Transaction costs and the land use planning process. Journal of Planning Literature 14:507-18. [DOI:10.1177/08854120022092809]
15. Ford, J. K., MacCallum, R. C., & Tait, M. (1986). The Application of Exploratory Factor-Analysis in Applied- Psychology - a Critical-Review and Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 39(2), 291-314. [DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1986.tb00583.x]
16. Forester, J. (1987). Planning in the face of conflict. Journal of the American Planning Association 53(3): 433-446 [DOI:10.1080/01944368708976450]
17. Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
18. Forester, J., Critical Theory Public policy and planning practice: Toward a critical pragmatism, New York: State university of New York Press, 1993.
19. Guan, D., Li, H., Inohae, T., Su, W., Nagaie, T., & Hokao, K. (2011). Modelling urban land use change by the integration of cellular automaton and Markov model. Ecological Modelling, 222, 3761e3772. [DOI:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.09.009]
20. Healey, P. (1994), 'Development plans: new approaches to making frameworks for land use regulation', European Planning Studies, 2, 38-58. [DOI:10.1080/09654319408720246]
21. Healey, P. (1998), Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society. Town Planning Review, 69, 1 -21. [DOI:10.3828/tpr.69.1.h651u2327m86326p]
22. Henson, RK., Roberts, JK., (2006), Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Published Research: Common Errors and Some Comment on Improved Practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement; 66(3). [DOI:10.1177/0013164405282485]
23. Howard, Matt C (2016), A Review of Exploratory Factor Analysis Decisions and Overview of Current Practices: What We Are Doing and How Can We Improve?, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 51-62. [DOI:10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664]
24. Hughes-Hammer, C., Martsolf, D., & Zeller, R. (1998). Development and testing of the codependency assessment tool. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 12, 264-272. [DOI:10.1016/S0883-9417(98)80036-8] [PMID]
25. Jones, C., Baker, M., Carter, J., Jay, S., Short, M., Wood, C. Introduction. In: Jones, C., Baker, M., Carter, J., Jay, S., Short, M., Wood, C., editors. Strategic environmental assessment and land use planning. An international evaluation. London: Earth scan; 2005. p. 1-13.
26. Kerlinger, F. (1986). Factor analysis. In F. Kerlinger, Foundations in behavioral research (3rd ed., pp. 569-593). Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
27. McAulsan, P. (1980), The Ideologies of Planning Law, Oxford, Pergamon publisher.
28. Meyer, W.B., Turner, B.L., (1996), Land-use/land-cover change: challenges for geographers. Geo Journal 39, 237-240. [DOI:10.1007/BF00188373]
29. Nan, S., (2004), On Public Interest in Urban Planning, City Planning Review, 06.
30. Nicholls, W. J. (2005), Power and governance: Metropolitan governance in France, Urban Studies, 42(4), 783-800. [DOI:10.1080/00420980500060426]
31. Pauleit, S. and Duhme, F. (2000) Assessing the environmental performance of land cover types for urban planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 52(1), pp. 1-20. [DOI:10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00109-2]
32. Peltonen, L., Sairinen, R., (2010), Integrating impact assessment and conflict management in urban planning: experiences from Finland, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30 (5), 328-337. [DOI:10.1016/j.eiar.2010.04.006]
33. Sapnas KG., Zeller RA., (2002), Minimizing sample size when using exploratory factor analysis for measurement. Journal of Nursing Measurement. 10(2):135-53. [DOI:10.1891/jnum.10.2.135.52552] [PMID]
34. Schmitt, T. A. (2011). Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4),304-321. [DOI:10.1177/0734282911406653]
35. Tabachnick, B., Fidell, L. (2014), Using multivariate statistics, 6th Edition, Pearson Education, Inc.
36. Tam, C. M., Zeng, S. X., and Tong, T. K. L. (2009). "Conflict analysis in public engagement program of urban planning in Hong Kong." J. Urban Plann. Dev., 135(2), 51-55. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2009)135:2(51)]
37. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. [DOI:10.1037/10694-000]
38. Thompson and Daniel, 1996. The Consensus Building Institute. Conducting conflict assessments in the land use context. A manual. The Consensus Building Institute & Pace University Land Use Law Center; 2000. Available from: http://web.mit.edu/publicdisputes/practice/pacemanual-ls-111500.pdf.
39. van Dijk, T., van der Wulp, N., 2010. Not in my open space: anatomy of neighborhood activism in defense of land use conversion, Landscape Urban Plan, 96 (1), 19-28. [DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.02.001]
40. Veldkamp, A., Lambin, E.F.,(2001), Predicting land-use change, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 85, 1-6 [DOI:10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00199-2]
41. von der Dunk, A., Gret-Regamey, A., Dalang, T., & Hersperger, A. M. (2011). Defininga typology of peri-urban land-use conflicts - A case study from Switzerland, Landscape and Urban Planning, 101(2), 149-156. [DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.02.007]
42. Walsh, S.J., Evans, T.P., Welsh, W.F., Entwisle, B., Rindfuss, R.R., (1999), Scale-dependent relationships between population and environment in Northeastern Thailand, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 65, 97-105.
43. Williams, B., Brown, T., y Onsman, A. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.3.93 https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.1.107 [DOI:10.33151/ajp.8.1.113]
44. Yeh, A.G.O., Wu, F., (1996), The new land development process and urban development in Chinese cities, International Journal of Urban and Regional. [DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2427.1996.tb00319.x]
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons — Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)