مدل‌سازی عوامل مؤثر بر تخریب سرمایه‌های طبیعی شهر(مطالعه موردی: شهر یزد)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران

2 کارشناس ارشد، گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران

چکیده

بیان مسئله: رشد شتابان و ناموزون شهرنشینی بدون توجه به توان‌های اکولوژیک، موجب تخریب دارایی‌های طبیعی و بروز چالش‌های حاد زیست‌محیطی شده است. سرمایه‌های طبیعی شهری نقشی حیاتی در بهبود کیفیت هوا، کاهش جزایر گرمایی و ارتقای سلامت و زیست‌پذیری دارند؛ اما دشواری ارزش‌گذاری آن‌ها سبب غفلت در تصمیم‌گیری‌های شهری می‌شود. شهر کویری یزد با محدودیت شدید سرانه فضای سبز و تخریب گسترده باغات سنتی، نمونه‌ای بارز از این بحران است. شناسایی عوامل کلیدی تخریب این دارایی های میتواند در سیاست های کنترل این تخریب موثر باشد
هدف: این پژوهش با هدف شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر تخریب دارایی‌های طبیعی شهر یزد و تحلیل روابط متقابل آن‌ها بر پایه مفاهیم مدیریت منابع، نقشه‌های شناختی فازی (FCM) و تحلیل پیچیدگی سیستم‌ها انجام شده است.
روش: پژوهش حاضر از نظر روش‌شناسی ترکیبی است. داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه‌های نیمه‌ساختاریافته و پرسش‌نامه‌های مبتنی بر  نقشه شناختی فازی از ۱۷ نفر از متخصصان محیط‌زیست و برنامه‌ریزی شهری گردآوری شد. تحلیل ساختاری و محاسبه شاخص‌های پیچیدگی سیستم با روش نقشه‌های شناختی فازی صورت گرفت.
یافته‌ها: سیستم تخریب دارایی‌های طبیعی یزد ماهیتی کاملاً پیچیده و غیرخطی دارد؛ به‌طوری که تراکم سیستم ۷۹۵/۰ و میانگین تعداد ارتباطات به‌ازای هر عنصر ۹۳/۱۱ است. عوامل مؤثر در ۷ محور اصلی شناسایی شدند: عوامل محیط‌زیستی و اقلیمی (۷ عامل)، حمل‌ونقل و انرژی (۶ عامل)، اقتصادی و توسعه‌ای (۵ عامل)، جمعیتی و اجتماعی (۴ عامل) و سایر مؤلفه‌های مرتبط با منابع آب، گردشگری، پسماند و ساختار شهری.
نتیجه­ گیری: تحلیل مدل نشان داد عوامل محیط‌زیستی و اقلیمی با بیشترین میزان اثرگذاری (میانگین ۸۳/۰) پیشران اصلی تخریب هستند و پس از آن عوامل حمل‌ونقل و انرژی (میانگین ۷۶/۰) و عوامل اقتصادی و توسعه‌ای (میانگین ۷۲/۰) قرار دارند. شاخص تراکم (۷۹۵/۰) و پیوند بالای متغیرها (۹۳/۱۱ ارتباط مکرر) اثبات می‌کند که هرگونه مداخله سیاستی در مدیریت شهری یزد، تأثیراتی زنجیره‌ای و غیرخطی بر کل شبکه اکولوژیک شهر خواهد داشت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Modeling the Factors Influencing the Degradation of Urban Natural Assets: A Case Study of Yazd City

نویسندگان [English]

  • Taha Rabbani 1
  • Fatemeh Rezaei Sadr Abadi 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2 M. Sc. in Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Rapid urbanization in arid regions like Yazd disrupts ecological sustainability, aggravating challenges such as air pollution, biodiversity loss, and land subsidence. Characterized by a fragile desert ecosystem, Yazd suffers from severe natural asset degradation, including the systemic destruction of historical qanats, agricultural orchards, and peripheral green spaces. This research adopts a systems-based analytical approach to identify, categorize, and model the socio-economic, institutional, and environmental driving forces behind this decline. Moving beyond descriptive environmental reporting, the study maps the complex causal feedback loops that perpetuate asset degradation, ultimately providing urban planners with a strategic, targeted tool for ecological intervention.
Methodology: This study employs a mixed-methods framework combining environmental scanning, semi-structured expert interviews, and quantitative Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping (FCM) to analyze complex socio-ecological interactions. Seventeen regional environmental specialists and urban planners were selected through purposive sampling. The research followed three phases: identifying primary variables via Delphi consultations; designing individual cognitive maps with directional weights (-1 to +1); and executing system simulations. Individual matrices were aggregated into a collective FCM using Mental Modeler software to measure system complexity, density, centrality, and out-degree/in-degree ratios.
Results: The aggregated FCM revealed a highly dense, interconnected network where specific policy interventions trigger cascading effects across the ecosystem. Variables were classified into transmitter, receiver, and ordinary categories.Simulation results highlighted three core degradation clusters: institutional loopholes (weak zoning enforcement and land speculation serving as primary transmitter variables), economic pressures (monetization of urban peripheral land and dried qanats), and biophysical constraints (groundwater depletion and drought cycles). Notably, "Land Speculation" and "Inadequate Environmental Regulations" exhibited the highest centrality indices, marking them as the primary operational leverage points within the system.
Discussion :The findings reveal that the degradation of natural assets in Yazd is fundamentally rooted in institutional and economic failures rather than purely biophysical limitations. While regional aridity plays a role, horizontal urban sprawl and land monetization primarily accelerate ecological collapse. Traditional top-down master plans consistently fail to value intangible ecosystem services. Unlike static decision-making frameworks, the FCM model captures non-linear feedback loops where degraded natural capital worsens urban public health and intensifies the urban heat island effect, trapping the city in a cycle of environmental decline and resource-intensive interventions.
Conclusion: This study developed a dynamic diagnosis of urban natural asset degradation in Yazd, illustrating how market-driven land use and institutional inefficiencies dominate the ecological landscape. To mitigate these systemic issues, the research recommends adopting a "compact city" planning model, integration of environmental economic accounting into municipal budgets, and strict legal protection for natural capital corridors. Future studies should focus on implementing dynamic policy scenarios within this FCM framework to predict the long-term impacts of specific regulatory reforms.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Natural Asset
  • Urban Sprawl
  • Urban Ecological Factors
  • Land-Use Change
  • System Complexity

مراجع

Alberti, M., Palkovacs, E. P., Roches, S. D., De Meester, L., Brans, K. I., Govaert, L., Grimm, N. B., Harris, N. C., Hendry, A. P., Schell, C. J., Szulkin, M., Munshi-South, J., Urban, M. C., & Verrelli, B. C. (2020). The Complexity of Urban Eco-evolutionary Dynamics. BioScience, 70(9), 772-793. DOI:10.1093/biosci/biaa079
Anguelovski, I., & Roberts, D. (2011). Spatial justice and climate change: Multiscale impacts and local development in Durban, South Africa. Environmental Justice, 4(3), 132–135 DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/8759.003.0004
Bateman, I. J., & Mace, G. M. (2020). The natural capital framework for sustainably efficient and equitable decision making. Nature Sustainability, 3(10), 776–783. DOI:10.1038/s41893-020-0552-3
Boyce, James. (2001). From Natural Resources to Natural Assets. NEW SOLUTIONS A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy 11(3):267-88. DOI:10.2190/5QPY-TPE0-JP5W-5FJE
Carr, B., Fitzsimons, J., Holland, N., Berkinshaw, T., Bradby, K., Cowell, S., Deegan, P., Koch, P., Looker, M., Varcoe, T., Walsh, P. and Weisenberger, F. (2017), CAPitalising on conservation knowledge: Using Conservation Action Planning, Healthy Country Planning and the Open Standards in Australia. Ecol Manag Restor, 18: 176-189. DOI:10.1111/emr.12267
Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C., & Maginnis, S. (2016). Nature-based Solutions to address global societal challenges. IUCN. DOI:10.2305/IUCN.CH.2016.13. DOI:10.2305/IUCN.CH.2016.13.en
Cole, D. H., & Grossman, P. Z. (1999). When is command-and-control efficient? Institutions, technology and the comparative efficiency of alternative regulatory regimes for environmental protection. Wisconsin Law Review, 887–93-https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/590
Costanza , R., (2020). Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability. Ecosystem Services ,43. DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101096.
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B.,... & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630), 253–260. DOI:10.1038/387253a0
Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Sutton, P., et al. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26, 152–158. DOI:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002
Dasgupta, P. (2021), The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. Full Report. 610 . (London: HM Treasury) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review
Dima, A. M. (2021). Resilience and economic intelligence through digitalization and big data analytics. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Economics and Social Sciences, 1–4. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/281607/1/1795613793.pdf
Elmqvist, T., Fragkias, M., Goodness, J., Güneralp, B., Marcotullio, P. J., McDonald, R. I.,... & Wilkinson, C. (Eds.). (2013). Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: Challenges and opportunities. Springer. DOI:10.1007/978-94-007-7088-1_3
Elmqvist, T., Setälä, H., Handel, S. N., van der Ploeg, S., Aronson, J., Blignaut, J. N., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Nowak, D. J., Kronenberg, J., & de Groot, R. (2015). Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 101–108. DOI:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.05.001
Escobar, A. (2008). Territories of difference: Place, movements, life, redes. Duke University Press. DOI:10.1215/9780822389439
European Commission. (2019). Green Infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital. https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-biodiversity/green-infrastructure_en
European Environment Agency. (2016). Urban sprawl in Europe: Joint EEA-FOEN report. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/urban-sprawl-in-europe
Fisher, Jessica C., Nawrath, M, Dallimer, Martin, Irvine, Katherine N. and Davies, Zoe G. (2022) Connecting biodiversity and human wellbeing. In: Aronson, M.F.J. and Nilon, C.H., eds. Routledge Handbook of Urban Biodiversity. First edition Taylor & Francis, Oxford, United Kingdom. DOI:10.4324/9781003016120-13
Frantzeskaki, N. (2019). Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environmental Science & Policy, 93, 101–111. DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2018.12.033
Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics, 86, 235–245. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019
Grimm, N. B., Faeth, S. H., Golubiewski, N. E., Redman, C. L., Wu, J., Bai, X., & Briggs, J. M. (2008). Global change and the ecology of cities. Science, 319(5864), 756–760.  DOI:10.1126/science.1150195
Guerry, A. D., Polasky, S., Lubchenco, J., et al. (2015). Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(24), 7348–7355. DOI:10.1073/pnas.1503751112
Haase, D., Frantzeskaki, N., & Elmqvist, T. (2014). Ecosystem services in urban landscapes: Practical applications and governance implications. Ambio, 43(4), 407–412. DOI:10.1007/s13280-014-0503-1
IEA -International Energy Agency. (2021). World energy outlook 2021. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2021
Inostroza, L., & de la Barrera, F. (2019). Ecosystem services and urbanisation: A spatially explicit assessment in Upper Silesia, Central Europe. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 471(9), 092028. DOI:10.1088/1757-899X/471/9/092028
 James & van Vianen, Josh & Foli, Samson & Clendenning, Jessica & Yang, Kevin & MacDonald, Margaret & Petrokofsky, Gillian & Pad och, Christine & Sunderland, Terry, 2017. "Trees for life: The ecosystem service contribution of trees to food production and livelihoods in the tropics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), 62-71. DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2017.01.012
Jansson, Å. (2013). Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 86, 285–291. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.06.013
Kaplan, R. (1993). The role of nature in the context of the workplace. Landscape and Urban Planning, 26(1–4), 193–201. DOI:10.1016/0169-2046(93)90016-7
La Rosa D, Spyra M, Inostroza L (2016) Indicators of Cultural Ecosystem Services for urban planning: A review. Ecological Indicators 61: 74‑89. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.04.028
Lottrup, L., Stigsdotter, U. K., Meilby, H., & Claudi, A. G. (2015). Workplace settings and wellbeing: Greenspace use and views contribute to employee wellbeing at peri-urban business sites. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 32–40. DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.004
Luederitz, C., Brink, E., Gralla, F., et al. (2015). A review of urban ecosystem services: Six key challenges for future research. Ecosystem Services, 14, 98–112. DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.05.001
Luederitz, C., Brink, E., Gralla, F., Hermelingmeier, V., Meyer, M., Niven, L., Panzer, L., Partelow, S., Rau, A.-L., Sasaki, R., Abson, D. J., Lang, D. J., Wamsler, C., & von Wehrden, H. (2015). A review of urban ecosystem services: Six key challenges for future research. Ecosystem Services, 14, 98–112. DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.05.001
Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., Groenewegen, P. P., et al. (2009). Morbidity is related to a green living environment. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 63(12), 967–973. DOI:10.1136/jech.2008.079038
Martínez-Alier, J. (2002). The environmentalism of the poor: A study of ecological conflicts and valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://cdn.unrisd.org/assets/library/papers/pdf-files/martinezalier.pdf
Mcdonald, Robert & Marcotullio, Peter. (2011). Global Effects of Urbanization on Ecosystem Services. Urban Ecology. 193-205. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199563562.003.0024.
McPhearson, T., Pickett, S. T. A., Grimm, N. B., Niemelä, J., Alberti, M., Elmqvist, T.,... & Qureshi, S. (2016). Advancing urban ecology toward a science of cities. BioScience, 66(3), 198–212. DOI:10.1093/biosci/biw002
Natural Capital Coalition. (2016). Natural Capital Protocol. https://naturalcapitalcoalition.org/natural-capital-protocol/https://capitalscoalition.org/
O'Keeffe, C., & McNally, S. (2025). ‘Understand more what we do’: Investigating children’s perspectives of play through a co-constructed review of the literature. Child Indicators Research, 18, 2245–2274. DOI:10.1007/s12187-025-10261-7
O'Keeffe, C., Pluchinotta, I., De Stercke, S., Hinson, C., Puchol-Salort, P., Mijic, A., Zimmermann, N., & Collins, A. M. (2022). Evaluating natural capital performance of urban development through system dynamics: A case study from London. Science of the Total Environment, 824, 153673. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153673
Okour, Y.; Shaweesh, H. Identifying the Barriers to Green Infrastructure Implementation in Semi-Arid Urban Areas Using the DPSIR Framework: A Case Study of Amman, Jordan. City Environ. Interact. 2024, 24, 100165. DOI:10.1016/j.cacint.2024.100165
Ozesmi, U. O. S. (2004). Ecological models based on people’s knowledge: A multi-step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Ecological Modelling, 176(1–2), 43–64.  DOI:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.10.027
Papageorgiou, E. I. (Ed.). (2014). Fuzzy cognitive maps for applied sciences and engineering. Springer. DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-39739-4
Raymond, C. M., Frantzeskaki, N., Kabisch, N., et al. (2017). A framework for assessing and implementing nature-based solutions in urban areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 167, 15–27. DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.07.008
Rezaei Sadrabadi, F. (2025). Analysis and Explanation of the Impact of Urban Natural Assets Destruction on Citizens' Health (Case Study: Yazd City) (Unpublished master's thesis). Department of Geography, Yazd University. Supervisor: T. Rabbani; Advisor: M. R. Rezaei.
Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., et al. (2020). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 375(1794), 20190120. DOI:10.1098/rstb.2019.0120
Seto, K. C., & Shepherd, J. M. (2009). Global urban land-use trends and climate impacts. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1(1), 89–95. DOI:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.07.012
Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012). Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(40), 16083–16088. DOI:10.1073/pnas.1211658109
Sjerp de Vries & Robert A Verheij & Peter P Groenewegen & Peter Spreeuwenberg, 2003. "Natural Environments—Healthy Environments? An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship between Greenspace and Health," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 35(10), 1717-1731,. DOI:10.1068/a35111
Sokolova, M. V., Fath, B. D., Grande, U., Buonocore, E., & Franzese, P. P. (2024). The Role of Green Infrastructure in Providing Urban Ecosystem Services: Insights from a Bibliometric Perspective. Land, 13(10), 1664. DOI:10.3390/land13101664
Transparency International. (2021). Corruption perceptions index 2021. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021/index/nzl
Ulrich, R. S. (1981). Natural versus urban scenes: Some psychophysiological effects. Landscape Planning, 8(6), 523–556. DOI:10.1016/0304-3924(81)90001-2
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development(UNCTAD). (2021). Technology and innovation report 2021. https://unctad.org/webflyer/technology-and-innovation-report-2021
United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP). (2020). Global biodiversity outlook 5.DOI:https://www.cbd.int/gbo5
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). (2020). State of the world's cities 2020. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2020/10/wcr_2020_report.pdf
United Nations. (2022). Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World urbanization prospects 2022. https://population.un.org/wup/
Vardoulakis, E.; Karamanis, D.; Fotiadi, A.; Mihalakakou, G. The urban heat island effect in a small Mediterranean city of high summer temperatures and cooling energy demand DOI:10.1016/j.solener.2013.04.016
Vasslides, J. M., & Jensen, O. P. (2016). Fuzzy cognitive mapping in support of integrated ecosystem assessments: Developing a shared conceptual model among stakeholders. Journal of Environmental Management, 166, 348–356.  DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.10.038
Willis KJ, Petrokofsky G. The natural capital of city trees. Science. 2017 Apr 28;356(6336):374-376. DOI:10.1126/science.aam9724. PMID: 28450596.
White MP, Pahl S, Wheeler BW, Depledge MH, Fleming LE. Natural environments and subjective wellbeing: Different types of exposure are associated with different aspects of wellbeing. Health Place. 2017 May;45:77-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2017.03.00
Gosling, W. D., & Williams, J. J. (2013). Ecosystem service provision sets the pace for pre-Hispanic societal development in the central Andes. The Holocene, 23(11), 1619-1624. https://doi.org/10.1177/09596836134962
World Bank. (2021). World development indicators 2021. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
World Health Organization(WHO). (2021). Air quality guidelines: Global update 2021. DOI:https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240062350
Yoon, B. S., & Jetter, A. J. (2016). Comparative analysis for fuzzy cognitive mapping. In PICMET 2016: Technology Management for Social Innovation (pp. 1037–1045). IEEE. DOI:10.1109/PICMET.2016.7806755
Zhang, Z., Ye, B., Yang, W., & Gao, Y. (2024). Effect of Nature Space on Enhancing Humans’ Health and Well-Being: An Integrative Narrative Review. Forests, 15(1), 100. DOI:10.3390/f15010100
 
دانش شهرسازی
دوره 10، شماره 1
فروردین 1405
صفحه 118-139

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 15 اسفند 1403
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 15 خرداد 1405

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار