IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i17p10543-d896223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigation of Urban Design Approaches in Renewal Areas with Hybrid Decision Model

Author

Listed:
  • Merve Koçak Güngör

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, Erciyes University, 38280 Kayseri, Turkey)

  • Bülent Bostancı

    (Department of Geomatics, Erciyes University, 38280 Kayseri, Turkey)

  • Neşe Yılmaz Bakır

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, Erciyes University, 38280 Kayseri, Turkey)

  • Umut Doğan

    (Department of Urban & Regional Planning, Erciyes University, 38280 Kayseri, Turkey)

Abstract

Generally, urban renewal practices in developing countries are formed by economic concerns and by ignoring the design dimension. As a result, these conditions create unqualified urban spaces in terms of livability. In this study, to analyze and evaluate this problem, a criterion framework and a hybrid spatial decision model are formed for improving the design quality of renewal projects. The authors defined 37 urban design criteria through literature research, expert opinions, and self-assessments. A multidisciplinary focus group was held and a paired comparison form was prepared to determine the criterion weights and suitability values with the used the fuzzy DEMATEL and weighted linear combination method. The values analyzed using ArcGIS 10.2 and the suitability values are shown on the map. As a result, it has been determined that even the highest valued among the examined renewal projects could not meet even 50% of the defined urban design quality standard. The results have emphasized that the urban renewal projects without area-specific and appropriate design solutions reveal that they cannot develop qualified places. Within the scope of realizing more qualified urban places, design criteria should also be taken into account in the project design processes. In future studies, this model can be used in determining the area-specific and appropriate design solution for spatial decision-makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Merve Koçak Güngör & Bülent Bostancı & Neşe Yılmaz Bakır & Umut Doğan, 2022. "Investigation of Urban Design Approaches in Renewal Areas with Hybrid Decision Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-21, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:17:p:10543-:d:896223
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/17/10543/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/17/10543/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sukran Seker & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2017. "Application of Fuzzy DEMATEL Method for Analyzing Occupational Risks on Construction Sites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Grace Lee & Edwin Chan, 2008. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Approach for Assessment of Urban Renewal Proposals," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 155-168, October.
    3. Mithat Zeydan & Bülent Bostancı & Burcu Oralhan, 2018. "A New Hybrid Decision Making Approach for Housing Suitability Mapping of an Urban Area," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-13, October.
    4. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    5. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Huang, Xianjin & Fu, Guole & Chen, Jia-Tsong & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "Evaluating the sustainability of urban renewal projects based on a model of hybrid multiple-attribute decision-making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Darius Danesh & Michael J. Ryan & Alireza Abbasi, 2017. "A systematic comparison of multi-criteria decision making methods for the improvement of project portfolio management in complex organisations," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 16(3), pages 280-320.
    7. M. Abbasi & R. Hosnavi & B. Tabrizi, 2013. "Application of Fuzzy DEMATEL in Risks Evaluation of Knowledge-Based Networks," Journal of Optimization, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-7, December.
    8. Wang, Reay-Chen & Chuu, Shian-Jong, 2004. "Group decision-making using a fuzzy linguistic approach for evaluating the flexibility in a manufacturing system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(3), pages 563-572, May.
    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. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Huang, Xianjin & Fu, Guole & Chen, Jia-Tsong & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "Evaluating the sustainability of urban renewal projects based on a model of hybrid multiple-attribute decision-making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Julian Canto-Perello & Maria P. Martinez-Garcia & Jorge Curiel-Esparza & Manuel Martin-Utrillas, 2015. "Implementing Sustainability Criteria for Selecting a Roof Assembly Typology in Medium Span Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Junpai Chen & Yue Chen & Yitong Zhu & Mingyan Xiao & Hongfei Yang & Huaming Huang & Linli Li, 2023. "Assessing the Sustainability of Urban Community Renewal Projects in Southern China Based on a Hybrid MADM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-33, February.
    4. Lingyan Li & Jiaxin Zhu & Mimi Duan & Pingbo Li & Xiaotong Guo, 2022. "Overcoming the Collaboration Barriers among Stakeholders in Urban Renewal Based on a Two-Mode Social Network Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, October.
    5. Anita Kwartnik-Pruc & Grzegorz Ginda & Anna Trembecka, 2022. "Using the DEMATEL Method to Identify Impediments to the Process of Determining Compensation for Expropriated Properties," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    6. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhang, Hejie & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Ye, Cheng-Zhou & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi, 2022. "Evaluating smart office buildings from a sustainability perspective: A model of hybrid multi-attribute decision-making," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    7. Tat-Dat Bui & Ming K. Lim & Raditia Yudistira Sujanto & Monica Ongkowidjaja & Ming-Lang Tseng, 2022. "Building a Hierarchical Sustainable Consumption Behavior Model in Qualitative Information: Consumer Behavior Influences on Social Impacts and Environmental Responses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Yongming Song & Jun Hu, 2017. "Vector similarity measures of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    10. Hae-Yeol Kang & Seung Taek Chae & Eun-Sung Chung, 2023. "Quantifying Medium-Sized City Flood Vulnerability Due to Climate Change Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques: Case of Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-20, November.
    11. Zheng, Guozhong & Wang, Xiao, 2020. "The comprehensive evaluation of renewable energy system schemes in tourist resorts based on VIKOR method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    12. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    13. Milad Zamanifar & Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseyni, 2017. "Recovery planning model for roadways network after natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 699-716, June.
    14. Pedro Ponce & Citlaly Pérez & Aminah Robinson Fayek & Arturo Molina, 2022. "Solar Energy Implementation in Manufacturing Industry Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Fuzzy TOPSIS and S4 Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-19, November.
    15. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    16. Mohit Jain & Gunjan Soni & Deepak Verma & Rajendra Baraiya & Bharti Ramtiyal, 2023. "Selection of Technology Acceptance Model for Adoption of Industry 4.0 Technologies in Agri-Fresh Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    17. Chen, Lisa Y. & Wang, Tien-Chin, 2009. "Optimizing partners' choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 233-242, July.
    18. Wenyao Niu & Yuan Rong & Liying Yu & Lu Huang, 2022. "A Novel Hybrid Group Decision Making Approach Based on EDAS and Regret Theory under a Fermatean Cubic Fuzzy Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(17), pages 1-30, August.
    19. Serrano García, Jakeline & Acevedo Álvarez, Carlos Alberto & Castelblanco Gómez, Johnatan Mauricio & Arbeláez Toro, Juan José, 2017. "Measuring organizational capabilities for technological innovation through a fuzzy inference system," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 93-109.
    20. Deb, Madhujit & Debbarma, Bishop & Majumder, Arindam & Banerjee, Rahul, 2016. "Performance –emission optimization of a diesel-hydrogen dual fuel operation: A NSGA II coupled TOPSIS MADM approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P1), pages 281-290.

    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:14:y:2022:i:17:p:10543-:d:896223. 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.