IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p4662-d541152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Circle in Space—Space in Circle: A Study of Ratio between Open Space and Built-Up Area in Historical Circular Objects

Author

Listed:
  • Biljana Stanislav Jović

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Horticulture, Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Aleksandar Acim Čučaković

    (Department of Mathematics, Physics and Descriptive Geometry, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Mihailo Nebojsa Grbić

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Horticulture, Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

Abstract

Many cities nowadays explore different circular designs as new sustainable city concepts in different urban aspects. The new trend, as part of the adaptation for climate change, is a strategy of increasing the number of urban open spaces, and circular plan design could be a sustainable approach to urban development. This paper provides a historical overview of various examples of circular objects containing built structures and open spaces from the Neolithic to the present. The Built-Up Area (BUA) and Open Space (OS) relationships are shown histogramically for 36 objects arranged chronologically. The morphospace analysis was performed to determine any possible regularity in the relationships of parts of circular objects. For the purpose of this research, three variables were chosen. First, all selected historical examples of circular objects were divided into two main categories: objects with a total diameter smaller than 300 m and objects with a total diameter bigger than 300 m. Additionally, the selected circular objects were divided by their type of open space to better understand their spatial position. The largest number of analyzed objects belongs to the Parks–Gardens category, followed by settlements, and then earth works, sacral objects and circular buildings, with the smallest number of circular objects being in the category of allotments and plazas. The second variable was Jam area and % of Jam. The buildings are of different sizes up to several hundred m 2 , and the areas range up to several hundred ha. The total area to OS ratio ranges from 0% (for Large Serdab) to 100% (for multiple objects). There is a similar situation with the diameter ratios (total and “jam”). Additionally, the final variable was the historical position of the selected circular objects. Circular objects belong to all historical periods from the Neolithic to the present. The aim of this research was to explore the relationship between OS and BUA in various circular objects with different diameters of open spaces and find out if there was any regularity in this relationship. The morphospace analysis of this research indicates that there is no clear regularity in the relationship between the built-up area and the open space, but the aspects and research results shown here contribute to sustainability since the circular design approach could play a key role in future circular design processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Biljana Stanislav Jović & Aleksandar Acim Čučaković & Mihailo Nebojsa Grbić, 2021. "Circle in Space—Space in Circle: A Study of Ratio between Open Space and Built-Up Area in Historical Circular Objects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:4662-:d:541152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4662/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4662/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gillian Foster & Ruba Saleh, 2021. "The Adaptive Reuse of Cultural Heritage in European Circular City Plans: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Robinson, John, 2004. "Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 369-384, April.
    3. Maria Cerreta & Eleonora Giovene di Girasole & Giuliano Poli & Stefania Regalbuto, 2020. "Operationalizing the Circular City Model for Naples’ City-Port: A Hybrid Development Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, April.
    4. Raheleh Rostami & Hasanuddin Lamit & Seyed Meysam Khoshnava & Rasoul Rostami & Muhamad Solehin Fitry Rosley, 2015. "Sustainable Cities and the Contribution of Historical Urban Green Spaces: A Case Study of Historical Persian Gardens," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-27, September.
    5. Julie Marin & Bruno De Meulder, 2018. "Interpreting Circularity. Circular City Representations Concealing Transition Drivers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-24, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ginevra Balletto & Mara Ladu & Federico Camerin & Emilio Ghiani & Jacopo Torriti, 2022. "More Circular City in the Energy and Ecological Transition: A Methodological Approach to Sustainable Urban Regeneration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Endl, Andreas & Tost, Michael & Hitch, Michael & Moser, Peter & Feiel, Susanne, 2021. "Europe's mining innovation trends and their contribution to the sustainable development goals: Blind spots and strong points," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    3. Palaniappan, Gomathy & King, Christine A. & Cameron, Don, 2009. "CS - Complexity Of Transition To Alternative Farming Systems," 17th Congress, Illinois State University, USA, July 19-24, 2009 345531, International Farm Management Association.
    4. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    5. Shaheera Banu Z & V. VIMALA, 2024. "Integration of ESG principles: An initiative for transformation from Linear Economy to Circular Economy," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(2(639), S), pages 183-196, Summer.
    6. Alcott, Blake, 2008. "The sufficiency strategy: Would rich-world frugality lower environmental impact," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 770-786, February.
    7. Engy Mohsen El Hawary & Iman Mamdouh Arafa, 2018. "Studying the Effect of Stakeholders on the Disclosure of Corporate Social Responsibility by Banks: Evidence from Egypt," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 7(4), pages 200-200, November.
    8. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    9. Bao-Li Miao & Ying Liu & Yu-Bing Fan & Xue-Jiao Niu & Xiu-Yun Jiang & Zeng Tang, 2023. "Optimization of Agricultural Resource Allocation among Crops: A Portfolio Model Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, October.
    10. Sini Forssell & Leena Lankoski, 2015. "The sustainability promise of alternative food networks: an examination through “alternative” characteristics," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(1), pages 63-75, March.
    11. Nadia Pintossi & Deniz Ikiz Kaya & Ana Pereira Roders, 2021. "Assessing Cultural Heritage Adaptive Reuse Practices: Multi-Scale Challenges and Solutions in Rijeka," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Walter J.V. Vermeulen, 2015. "Self‐Governance for Sustainable Global Supply Chains: Can it Deliver the Impacts Needed?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 73-85, February.
    13. repec:lib:000cis:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:29-40 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    15. Yu Li & Ji Zheng & Fei Li & Xueting Jin & Chen Xu, 2017. "Assessment of municipal infrastructure development and its critical influencing factors in urban China: A FA and STIRPAT approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-14, August.
    16. Theodoros Iosifides & George Korres, 2005. "European Integration and the Future of Social Policy Making," ERSA conference papers ersa05p11, European Regional Science Association.
    17. Hadi Soltanifard & Elham Jafari, 2019. "A conceptual framework to assess ecological quality of urban green space: a case study in Mashhad city, Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1781-1808, August.
    18. Maria Federica Cordova & Andrea Celone, 2019. "SDGs and Innovation in the Business Context Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Simona-Roxana Ulman & Costica Mihai & Cristina Cautisanu, 2020. "Peculiarities of the Relation between Human and Environmental Wellbeing in Different Stages of National Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-26, October.
    20. Else Ragni Yttredal & Nathalie Homlong, 2020. "Perception of Sustainable Development in a Local World Heritage Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-19, October.
    21. Jennifer Petoskey & Missy Stults & Eileen Naples & Galen Hardy & Alicia Quilici & Cassie Byerly & Amelia Clark & Deja Newton & Elizabeth Santiago & Jack Teener, 2021. "Envisioning a Circular Economy: The Journey of One Mid-Sized Midwestern City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:4662-:d:541152. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.