大数据与城市规划 (37).pdf
《大数据与城市规划 (37).pdf》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《大数据与城市规划 (37).pdf(9页珍藏版)》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。
1、Evaluating the effectiveness of urban growth boundaries using humanmobility and activity recordsYing Longa,Haoying Hanb,Yichun Tuc,Xianfan ShudaBeijing Institute of City Planning,ChinabDepartment of Urban and Regional Planning,Zhejiang University,ChinacDepartment of City and Regional Planning,Univer
2、sity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,United StatesdDepartment of Land Management,Zhejiang University,Chinaa r t i c l ei n f oArticle history:Received 18 December 2014Received in revised form 3 May 2015Accepted 3 May 2015Keywords:Plan implementation evaluationBig dataSocial networkTransit smartcard
3、 dataBeijinga b s t r a c tWe proposed a methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of Beijings Urban Growth Boundaries(UGBs)using human mobility and activity records(big data).The research applied data from location check-in,transit smart card,taxi trajectory,and residential travel survey.We develop
4、ed four types of measures toevaluate the effectives of UGBs in confining human activities and travel flows,to examine the conformityof urban activities with the planned population,and to measure the activity connections between UGBs.With the large proportions of intra-and inter-boundary travel flows
5、 and an overwhelming majority ofcheck-ins inside the UGBs,the research concluded that Beijings UGBs were effective in containing humanmobility and activity.However,the connections between UGBs,indicated by the spatial differentiation ofthe travel flows,were not consistent with the plans intention an
6、d strategy.It indicated the potentialunderdevelopment of the public transit serving several new cities.?2015 Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.1.IntroductionEvaluation of plan implementation is important because itreflects the extent to which a plan succeeds in predicting,guiding,and controlling futu
7、re urban development.One common way todetermine what a plan has accomplished is to measure the confor-mance degree between the actual outcomes or impacts and theproposed plans.By doing so,planners can acquire insights onhow the planning decision-making process operates and validatewhether planning e
8、fforts do contribute to goal achievement(Alexandar&Faludi,1989;Alexander,2009;Laurian et al.,2004;Talen,1996b).This evaluation helps establish a responsive andaccountableplan-makingand-implementationprocess,thusimproving the overall quality of planning.Since the early 1970s,numerous studies have con
9、tributed to the theoretical and method-ological understandings in the field of planning evaluation.A fewstudies have illustrated the evaluation approaches with one partic-ular aspect of planning,including land development(Alterman&Hill,1978;Berke et al.,2006;Chapin,Deyle,&Baker,2008),environmental p
10、lanning(Brody&Highfield,2005),public facilitiesand infrastructure(Laurian et al.,2004;Talen,1996a),and urbansprawl control(Altes,2006;Brody,Carrasco,&Highfield,2006;Nelson&Moore,1993).In this study we focused on assessing plan implementation interms of the effectiveness of urban growth boundaries.As
11、 one ofthe most widely adopted urban containment policy tools,urbangrowth boundaries(UGBs)have been used to control the expan-sion of urban areas,increase urban land use density,and protectopen spaces(Pendall,Martin,&Fulton,2002).The basic conceptof implementing a UGB is to set a physical boundary s
12、eparatingurban and rural areas.Usually,urban developments are notallowed outside the predefined boundary.Broadly speaking,theimplementation of UGBs also encompasses various regulatorytechniquessuchaszoningandlanddevelopmentpermits.Proponents argue that urban growth boundaries may have at leastthe fo
13、llowing six merits(Staley,Edgens,&Mildner,1999):(1)preserve open space and farmland;(2)minimize the use of landgenerally by reducing lot sizes and increasing residential densities;(3)reduce infrastructure costs by encouraging urban revitalization,infill,and compact development;(4)clearly separate ur
14、ban andrural uses;(5)ensure the orderly transition of land from rural tourban uses;and(6)create a sense of community.An increasingnumber of cities in the U.S.and Europe have regarded UGBs as akey tool in controlling urban sprawl.However,the empiricalhttp:/dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.05.0010264-
15、2751/?2015 Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.Corresponding author at:Department of Urban and Regional Planning,AnzhongBuilding,Zhejiang University(Zi-Jin-Gang Campus),Yu-Hang-Tang Road 866,Hangzhou 310058,China.E-mail addresses:(Y.Long),(H.Han),ytulive.unc.edu(Y.Tu),(X.Shu).Cities 46(2015)7684Content
16、s lists available at ScienceDirectCitiesjournal homepage: measuring the effectiveness of UGBs are not common.Thisis partly because that plan implementation evaluation has rarelyattracted adequate attention in the planning profession.It has beenan afterthought to the planning decision-making or imple
17、menta-tion framing(Berke et al.,2006;Talen,1996a).The lack of data,robust evaluation theories and methodologies,as well as of thelinkages between theory and practice are among some of the majorreasons for its limited applications in planning practices(Brody,Highfield,&Thornton,2006;Laurian et al.,20
18、04;Oliveira&Pinho,2010;Talen,1996a,1996b).In addition to these general issues,the development of UGBsimplementation evaluation has also been constrained by the over-simplified evaluation dimension.To date,most relevant studiesfocused on assessing the physical outcomes,that is,the degree towhich the
19、actual urban extent and development layout conformto the proposed UGBs.For instances,several studies utilizedremote sensing images and geographic information system to trackland use/cover changes(e.g.Hasse,2007;Hepinstall-Cymerman,Coe,&Hutyra,2013).Among them,Han,Lai,Dang,Tan,and Wu(2009)examined th
20、e effectiveness of the UGBs in Beijing overtwo planning implementation periods,19831993 and 19932005,and concluded that the UGBs failed to contain urban growth.Some studies focused on analyzing the driving forces of the urbanexpansion(Boarnet,McLaughlin,&Carruthers,2011;Brueckner&Fansler,1983;Burchf
21、ield,Overman,Puga,&Turner,2006;Long,Gu,&Han,2012).Using quantitative techniques such as regressionmodels,these studies helped identify the effects of particular vari-ables(e.g.planning and political elements like UGBs,built environ-ments,and socioeconomic attributes)on urban expansion or landdevelop
22、ment.Ideally,one could look into the land use data toexamine the land use changes.However,in China,an accuratelyand timely monitoring of land use changes is never an easy task.A comprehensive land use survey of a Chinese city may take aslong as 10 years,and even longer in some large cities.Even afte
23、rplanners acquire the results of the most recent land use survey,they may find that the data are either inadequate or inaccurate.Polygons in land use maps are usually very big,omitting much use-ful information.Also,some areas that have been lately developedas urban uses or urban infrastructures may
24、still be marked as agri-cultural use(Long&Liu,2013).Due to the burdensome task to pro-vide real-time changes of land uses,a relatively easier way toacquire a city-scale change of human activities would be a helpfulsupplement to the traditional land use examinations with poorreliability.Moreover,one
25、of the major problems associated withthese studies is that they simply equal urban expansion to thechanges in land cover or use.What has been ignored is the assess-ment of how human activities actually react to the UGBs whenpeople utilize urban spaces and development where UGBs intendto regulate.Wha
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 大数据与城市规划 37 数据 城市规划 37
限制150内