{"title":"Analysis of the spatial inequality in residential quality indicators: the 22 urban regions of Tehran Metropolis","authors":"Moslem Zarghamfard, Behnaz Bahadori, Robab Hoseinzadeh, Esmaiel Safaralizadeh","doi":"10.12775/bgss-2023-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research objective: the present study seeks to assess and analyze the status of residential quality indicators in the 22 urban regions of the Tehran metropolis. \nMethodology: 79 residential quality variables are classified into the four indicators of physical, economic, ecological, and socio-cultural indices. Shannon entropy model, the coefficient of variation, TOPSIS, hotspot analysis, and Moran spatial autocorrelation were used for data analysis. \nResults: Results of the present study indicated a TOPSIS score of 0.58 for the integrated indicators which revealed region 1 had the best and region 15 had the worst status. In fact, a sort of divergence and heterogeneity rules residential quality indicators in Tehran urban regions, so that among the 22 urban regions of the city, around 4.5% were advantaged while 13.6% were relatively advantaged, 77.3% were semi- advantaged, and 4.5% were less advantaged. Results of statistical spatial analysis also indicate that the advantaged clusters were located in northern and northeastern parts of the city while the less advantaged and extremely less advantaged clusters were more focused in the southern and southeastern parts of the city, and residential quality indicators followed a cluster pattern. \nConclusion: A spatial difference and inequality in residential quality index distribution were observed in the 22 urban regions of Tehran so that the regions located in the southern and southeastern parts of the city had an unfavorable status in terms of residential quality indicators while the northern and northeastern regions were more advantaged in this regard. ","PeriodicalId":45441,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Geography-Socio-Economic Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of Geography-Socio-Economic Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12775/bgss-2023-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Research objective: the present study seeks to assess and analyze the status of residential quality indicators in the 22 urban regions of the Tehran metropolis.
Methodology: 79 residential quality variables are classified into the four indicators of physical, economic, ecological, and socio-cultural indices. Shannon entropy model, the coefficient of variation, TOPSIS, hotspot analysis, and Moran spatial autocorrelation were used for data analysis.
Results: Results of the present study indicated a TOPSIS score of 0.58 for the integrated indicators which revealed region 1 had the best and region 15 had the worst status. In fact, a sort of divergence and heterogeneity rules residential quality indicators in Tehran urban regions, so that among the 22 urban regions of the city, around 4.5% were advantaged while 13.6% were relatively advantaged, 77.3% were semi- advantaged, and 4.5% were less advantaged. Results of statistical spatial analysis also indicate that the advantaged clusters were located in northern and northeastern parts of the city while the less advantaged and extremely less advantaged clusters were more focused in the southern and southeastern parts of the city, and residential quality indicators followed a cluster pattern.
Conclusion: A spatial difference and inequality in residential quality index distribution were observed in the 22 urban regions of Tehran so that the regions located in the southern and southeastern parts of the city had an unfavorable status in terms of residential quality indicators while the northern and northeastern regions were more advantaged in this regard.