Comparison of the architecture and urbanism students' approach to

Roosta, Maryam; Daneshmand, Sara

doi:10.30475/isau.2021.227360.1392

Comparison of the architecture and urbanism students' approach to "Sustainable neighborhood"(Case study: Architecture and urbanism students of Shiraz University)

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

Maryam Roosta ¹

Sara Daneshmand ²

¹ Assistant Professor, Department of Urban Planning & Design, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

² Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.30475/isau.2021.227360.1392

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Background and Objectives: Cultivating and teaching the concepts of the sustainable neighborhood to different groups of people has been one of the executive goals in order to achieve sustainable development in different countries. Therefore, the educational content presented in the form of sustainability topics in architecture and urban planning faculties, that are considered as the most important educational context of the concepts of "sustainable city and neighborhood" to future owners of these professions, is very important. The present study seeks to compare the perceptions of architecture and urban planning students from the sustainable neighborhood to be used in providnig the educational content of courses related to the residential complex and neighborhood design in these fields. The results of this analysis can be used in architecture and urban planning faculties to improve the different aspects of "sustainable neighborhood" for students and in architectural and urban planning projects. The main question in this regard is: What are the similarities and differences between architecture and urban planning students in prioritizing sustainable development aspects and indicators and using examples to achieve a sustainable neighborhood?
Methods: In this study, after reviewing the literature, 14 indicators in the form of 5 categories were selected as the indicators of a sustainable neighborhood. The questionnaire was comprised of open and closed questions, which were answered by 27 architecture students and 27 urban planning students at Shiraz University in one semester. The data obtained from the collected questionnaires were analyzed with two quantitative and qualitative approaches for spectral and descriptive questions. In order to analyze the quantitative data after transfering it to SPSS software, the "Friedman" and "Mann-Whitney U Test" were used to rank the indicators in each group and examine the differences between the two groups. Qualitative data were also qualitatively analyzed after their categorization and the formation frequency table.
Findings: According to urban planning students, the indicators of "vegetation and green space," "social interactions," and "attention to pedestrian-based transportation" are the most important in achieving a sustainable neighborhood, and indicators of "indigenous culture patterns," "clean energy" are the least important indicators in the lists. In the process of planning and designing a sustainable neighborhood, these students also pay the most attention and the least attention to the indicators of "pedestrian-based transportation," "providing security," and "promoting social solidarity" in the neighborhood. Architecture students mostly focused on the realization of sustainable neighborhoods according to the indicators of "privacy," "security," "social interactions," and "pedestrian transportation." According to architecture students, the indicators of "mixed user model" and "local employment" were the least important in realizing a sustainable neighborhood. In the design process, the least attention has been paid to these two indicators. These students also paid the most attention to the characteristics of "privacy," "vegetation and green space," and creating a "sense of belonging" in the design. Urban planning students focused more on functional and economical aspects in achieving sustainability, while architecture students paid more attention to the "cultural" aspects. The architecture and urban planning students both considered the indicators of "social interactions" and "security" in recognizing the social indicators of sustainable neighborhoods. Also, in the environmental aspects, "vegetation and green space" in realizing a sustainable neighborhood were recognized as important aspects and they were considered by both groups. In general, paying attention to the physical dimensions and especially the details of space design among architecture students and paying attention to functional and non-physical dimensions among urban planning students is evident in case studies.
Conclusion: Although a part of the differences between architecture and urban planning students is due to the nature and the view of these two disciplines to the concept of "sustainable neighborhood," the consideration of neglected indicators and sustainable aspects in each discipline can contribute to the improvement of students' perception of the sustainable neighborhood. Therefore, paying more attention to the physical aspects and design details and the application of cultural sustainability indicators in teaching sustainable neighborhood design to urban planning students can be effective. In addition, paying more attention to the functional aspects of sustainable neighborhoods and the application of functional indicators in sustainable neighborhood architecture is effective for architecture students. In planning the course of architectural design 5 for architecture students, strengthening the "functional" and "activity" dimensions of the sustainable neighborhood according to the scale and the nature of the discipline and the practical exercises can help the the students to have a comprehensive view of the "sustainable neighborhood." Urban planning students need to further study and explain the "cultural" dimension of the sustainable neighborhood and especially its indigenous dimensions. Paying more attention to physical and aesthetic details in the design, apaprt form the general and functionalist view can lead to a better understanding of sustainable neighborhood.

Graphical Abstract

Comparison of the architecture and urbanism students approach to Sustainable neighborhood(Case study: Architecture and urbanism students of Shiraz University)

Highlights

- The difference between the approach of architecture and urban planning students to the sustainable neighborhood has been studied quantitatively and qualitatively.

- Urban planning students paid more attention to the functional and economic dimensions of sustainable neighborhood.

- For architecture students, the cultural dimensions of sustainable neighborhood have been more priority and importance.

Keywords

Sustainable Neighborhood

Architecture Students

Urban Planning Students

Architecture and Urban Planning Education

Ahmadi, A., Faizi, M., Ahmadi, M. (2016). Investigating statue and importance of the environmental sustainability subjects in bachelor of architecture. Hoviat Shahr, Vol. 10, No. 26, 85- 98.

Alinasab M., Suzanchi K. (2013). Sustainable development of urban River Valley based on ecological assessment (Case study: Darabad River Valley ,Tehran). Naqshejahan, 3 (2):51-61.

Amir Shaghaghi, S., Golestani, A., Ghahramanifar, H. (2014). The Role of Creativity of Islamic Art in the Emergence of the City of the Islamic Creator and Its Impact on the Culture and Architectural Art of Contemporary City, Abstract of the National Conference on Architecture, Culture and Urban Management, Karaj, p. 442.

Arundel, R., Ronuld, R. (2015). The role of urban form in sustainability of community: The case of Amsterdam, Environmental and Planning B, Urban Analytics and city science, 44 (1): 33-53.

Azeiteiro, U. M., Nicolau, P. B, Caetano, F.J.P. Caeiro, S. (2014). Education for sustainable development through e-learning in higher education: experiences from Portugal, Journal of Cleaner Production, 106: 308-319.

Azimi Amoli, J. (2017). Measurement of sustainability level in urban neighborhoods based on sustainability indicators (Case study: Tandast and Siahteli neighborhood in Babol), Journal of Geography (Iranian Geographical Association), Volume 15, Number 52, 367-394.

Azizi, M .M. (2006). Sustainable Residential Neighborhood: The Case Study of Narmak Neighborhood, Tehran, Journal of Fine Arts, No. 27, 35-46.

Bacon, C.M., Getz, C. Kraus, S., Montenegro, M, and Holland, K. (2012). The social dimensions of sustainability and change in diversified farming systems. Ecology and Society, 17(4): 41.

Barton, H, (2000). Sustainable Communities, the Potential for Eco-Neighbourhood, Earthscan Publication, London.

Blowers, A., Pain, K. (1999). The Sustainable City? In: G Mooney, S Pile and C Brook: Unruly Cities, Routledge Press, London, 223-265.

Bramley, G. & Power, S. (2009). Urban Form and Social Sustainability: The Role of Density and Housing Type, Environmental Planning B, Planning & Design, 36 (1), 30-45.

Bramley, G., Dempsey, N., Power, S., Brown, C. & Watkins, D. (2009). Social Sustainability and Urban Form: Evidence from Five British Cities, Environment and Planning, A, (41), 2125.

Carter-Bonham, C. (2010). Sustainable Communities in the U.K. Published in Sustainable Communities. Edited by Woodrow W. Clark II. Springer. USA.

Condon, P. (2010). Seven Rules for Sustainable Communities, Washington: Island Press.

Colantonio, A. (2011). Social Sustainability: Exploring the Linkages between Research, Policy and Practice, Springer.

Colantonio, A., Dixon, T. (2011). Urban Regeneration and Social Sustainability: Best Practice from European cities, Wiley, Blackwill.

Dave, S. (2011). Neighbourhood Density and Social Sustainability in Cities of Developing Countries, Sustainable Development, 19, 189-205.

Dempsey, N., Brown, C., Raman, S., Porta, S., Jenks, M., Jones, C., Braley, G. (2010). Elements of Urban Form, In: Jenks, M, and Jones, C.: Dimensions of the Sustainable City, Springer.

Friedman, A. (2014). Fundamentals of sustainable neighbourhoods, (M. Nemati Mehr and A. Yadollahpour, Ttans.), Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University, Printing & Publishing Center.

Golkar, K. (2001). Components of urban design quality, Soffeh Magazine, Vol.11, No. 32, 38-65.

Hemani, S. & Das, A., K. (2015). Humanising urban development in India: call for a more comprehensive approach to social sustainability in the urban policy and design context, International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 8 (2). 144- 173.

Hemani, S., Das, A., K., Chowdhury, A. (2016). Influence of urban forms on social sustainability: A case of Guwahati, Assam, Urban Design International, 22 (2), 168- 194.

Holm, T., Sammalisto, K., Grindsted, T.S., Vuorisalo., T. (2015). Process framework for identifying sustainability aspects in university curricula and integrating education for sustainable development, Journal of Cleaner Production. 106: 164- 174.

Hosseini, S. B., Mofidi Shemirani, S., and Madi, H. (2008). Education of Sustainable architecture in Iran; Barriers and Trends, Journal of Technology and Education, 3 (2): 212-221.

Hosseini, S. B., Rezazadeh, R., Bagheri, M., Azemati, H. R., and Ghenbaran, A. (2010). Environmental sustainability in urban open spaces: quality assessment of residential quarters in Tabriz. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. No. 11: 173-184.

Hume, T, Barry, J. (2015). Environmental Education and Education for Sustainable Development, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 733-739.

Iranmanesh, M., and Khajehpour, E. (2014). Education of Sustainable Architecture or Sustainable Education of Architecture, Journal of Fine Arts - Architecture and Urban Planning, 19 (1): 83-92.

Karimi, S. (2009): Roll of local development in sustainable urban development case study: Evin’s neighborhood, Journal of Human Geography, Vol. 1, No. 3, 81-92.

Majd Ara, A. (2014). Reflection of Iranian Islamic culture in the architecture of Iranian introverted houses (with reflection on the Boroujerdi houses of Kashan), Abstracts of the National Conference on Architecture, Culture and Urban Management, Karaj, 333-347.

Mazumdar, S., Lerrnihan, V., Cochrane, T., Davey, R. (2017). The Built Environment and Social Capital: A Systematic Review, Environment and Behavior, 50.

Mofidi Shemirani, S. M., and Moztarzadeh, H. (2014). Explaining the Sustainable Urban Community Structural Criteria, Bagh-e Nazar, Vol.11, No. 29, 59-70.

Mohammadpour Zarandi, H., and Tabatabaei Mazdabadi, S. M. (2015). Training in sustainable urban development. Journal of Urban Economics and Management, 3 (10): 111-125.

Moradi, M., Bani Asadi, S., Bahrami, E. (2014). Recognition of Rational Principles in Iranian Horticulture, Abstracts of the National Conference on Architecture, Culture and Urban Management, Karaj, 449-462.

Mouratidis, K. (2018). Built environment and social well-being: How does urban form affect social life and personal relationships?. Cities, 74, 7-20.

Movahed, A., Kamanroodi, M., Sasanpur, F., and Ghasemi Kafrudi, S. (2014). Investigating the sustainability of urban neighborhoods Case studies; 19th district of Tehran municipality), Journal of Geography and Urban PlanningResearch, Volume 2, Number 4, 541-558.

Norouzi, R., and Bahmanpour, H. (2014). Sustainable neighborhood design criteria based on environmental norms. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Urban Planning. 1 (2): 80-65.

Power, A. (2004). Sustainable Communities and Sustainable Development, London: Sustainable Development Commission.

Raco, M. (2007). Building Sustainable Communities, Spatial Policy-Place Imaginations and Labor Mobility in Post- War Britain, Bristol: Policy Press.

Rapaport, A. (1976). The Mutual Interaction of People and Their Built Environment. A Cross-Cultural Perspective, (R. Rezazadeh, Trans.), Tehran: Jihad-e-Daneshgahi Publications, Iran University of Science and Technology.

Rapaport, A. (1990). The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach, (F. Habib, Trans.), Tehran: Urban Planning and Processing Company Publications.

Roseland, M. (2005). Toward Sustainable Communities, Canada: New Society Publishers.

Seyed Almasi, M. (2009). Investigating the need for sustainable architecture education in Iranian universities. Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch. Tehran Iran.

Shirazi, M.R., Keivani, R. (2017). Critical reflections on the theory and practice of social sustainability in the built environment – a meta-analysis, Local Environment, 22(12), 1526-1545.

Wheeler, S. (2004). Planning for Sustainability, Routledge. London.

Whillis, M. (2006). Sustainability; the Issue of Our Age and a Concern for Local Government, Public Management, 88. 8-12.

Yiftachel, O., Hedgcock, D. (1993). Urban social Sustainability: The planning of an Australian city. Cities, 10, s 139-157.

Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M. d., and Teriman, S. (2015). Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment: Evaluating Residential Development Sustainability in a Developing Country Context, Sustainability, No. 7, 2570-2602.

Yung, E.H.K., Chan, E.H.W., Xu, Y. (2011) Sustainable Development and the Rehabilitation of a Historic Urban District – Social Sustainability in the Case of Tianzifang in Shanghai, Sustainable Development, 25 (2). 95-112.