Layering Analysis of Typomorphology Dynamics in Rural Settlements Using the AHP Method
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2024.280Keywords:
Morphological dynamics, Typomorphology, Analytical hierarchy process (AHP), Rural settlements, Layer analysisAbstract
The objective of this study is to identify the typomorphological dynamics of rural settlements and to prioritize them hierarchically using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. Furthermore, the study aims to investigate changes in the top three dynamics over time in a sample village through the application of fractal and space syntax analysis. The dynamic and sub-dynamic elements of typomorphology were gathered from previous studies carried out at the urban and rural scales, and their equivalents in the rural settlement context were determined. The study participants, including 26 academics and independent architects and urban planners, were asked to participate in an online survey to rank the 12 typomorphological dynamics identified. The results were analyzed to determine the weighted outcomes of the dynamics and to form a hierarchical order of importance. The consistency ratio was also calculated. A fractal and space syntax analysis were conducted for the first three dynamics in a sample village to analyze the adaptation and mutation processes of the settlement region. The AHP results showed that cultivated and natural areas, socio-spatial references, and road/path networks are the key dynamics in the typomorphological analysis of rural settlements. The results emphasize the importance of enacting rural protection laws to regulate settlement and agricultural activities, given the significant impact of economic and demographic changes on rural settlement morphology. The study also highlights the need for sustainable land use practices that balance human settlement and agricultural activities with the preservation of natural ecosystems. Furthermore, the study underscores the role of road/path networks in shaping occupancy and emptiness. The results offer valuable insights into monitoring rural dynamics and managing rural settlements. The identified dynamics and their weighted values can guide decision-makers in rural planning and development.
Metrics
References
Antrop, M. (1988). Invisible connectivity in rural landscapes. Proceedings of the Second International Seminar of IALE, Connectivity in Landscape Ecology, 29, 57–62.
Ata, İ. A., & Başar, M. E. (2023). Application of digital urban memory transmission model for sustainability of cultural heritage. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 11(1), 271–292.
Barrios, E. B. (2008). Infrastructure and rural development: Household perceptions on rural development. Progress in Planning, 70(1), 1–44.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge Anchor Books, Garden City, NY.
Bovill, C. (1996). Fractal geometry in architecture and design. Springer.
Ching, B., & Creed, G. W. (2013). Knowing your place: Rural identity and cultural hierarchy. Routledge.
Christaller, W. (1933). Die zentralen Orte in Suddeutschland: Eine okonomisch-geographische Untersuchung uber die Gesetzmassigkeit der Verbreitung und Entwicklung der Siedlungen mit stadtischen Funktionen. Jena.
Cloke, P. (2006). Conceptualizing rurality. Handbook of Rural Studies, 18, 18–28.
Cromartie, J., & Bucholtz, S. (2008). Defining the" rural" in rural America.
Çubuk, M. (1985). Türkiye’de kentleşme süreci ve kırsal alan sorunları kolokyumu (Vol. 2). Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi.
Demi̇roğlu, B. (2020). Ankara Polatlı Bölgesindeki Kırsal Yerleşim Yerlerinin Oluşum Ve Gelişim Analizi [Doktora Tezi]. Konya Teknik Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü.
Eker, M. (2014). Kültürel Etkileşimin Niteliksel Dinamikleri Olarak Sanatta Norm’al Ve Form’al Çelişkiler. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), Article 1.
Erdoğan, A. (2013). Polatlı tarih ve kültür atlası. Polatlı Belediyesi Yayınları.
Erkan, R. (2002). Kentleşme ve sosyal değişme. Bilimadamı Yayınları.
Geray, C. (2011). Dünden bugüne kırsal gelişme politikaları. Phoenix.
Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and modern social theory: An analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. Cambridge University Press.
Gür, Ş. Ö. (2000). Doğu Karadeniz örneğinde konut kültürü. Yapı-Endüstri Merkezi Yayınları.
Hernandez, L. (2007). The Loss of an Ordinary Landscape. New Plymouth District Council.
Hill, M. R. (2003). Rural settlement and the urban impact on the countryside. Hodder & Stoughton.
Hillery, G. A. (1955). Definition of community. Rural Sociology, 20, 111–123.
Hillier, B. (2007). Space is the Machine_ A Configurational Theory of Architecture.
Hoggart, K. (1988). Not a definition of rural. Area, 35–40.
Hu, X., Li, H., Zhang, X., Chen, X., & Yuan, Y. (2019). Multi-dimensionality and the totality of rural spatial restructuring from the perspective of the rural space system: A case study of traditional villages in the ancient Huizhou region, China. Habitat International, 94, 102062.
İlhan, C. (2019). Sayısal Analiz Yöntemleriyle Mimari Dokuyu Okumak: Bursa—Hisar Bölgesi [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. T.C. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Jia, K., Huang, X., Qiao, W., & Zhong, S. (n.d.). Unpacking the Divergent Trajectories of the Rural-Urban Interface in China: A Comparative Socio-Spatial Analytics Approach. Available at SSRN 4646151.
Kanatlar, Z. (2012). ULUDAĞ ÜNİVERSİTESİ FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Uludağ Üniversitesi.
Keleş, R. (1990). Kentleşme politikası. İmge Kitabevi.
Keleş, R. (1998). Kentbilim terimleri sözlügü. Imge Kitabevi.
Kılınçaslan, T., Elker, C., & Sutcliffe, E. B. (2012). Kentsel ulaşım: Ulaşım sistemi-Toplu taşım-Planlama-politikalar. Ninova.
Kurt, H. (2003). Türkiye’de kent-köy çelişkisi. Siyasal Kitabevi.
Lefebvre, H. (2014). Mekanın üretimi (I. Ergüden, Trans.). Sel Yayıncılık.
Li, R., & Mao, L. (2022). Spatial Characteristics of Suburban Villages Based on Spatial Syntax. Sustainability, 14(21), 14195.
Lukez, P. (2007). Suburban transformations. Princeton Architectural Press, Princeton, NJ.
Mandelbrot, B. B., & Mandelbrot, B. B. (1982). The fractal geometry of nature (Vol. 1). WH freeman New York.
Nita, J. (2015). The importance of the determinants and discriminants in the landscape research. Diss. Cult. Landsc. Commis, 30, 59–70.
Norberg-Schulz, C. (2019). Genius loci: Towards a phenomenology of architecture (1979). Historic Cities: Issues in Urban Conservation, 8, 31.
Oldfield, P. (2005). Rural settlement and economic development in Southern Italy: Troia and its contado, c. 1020-c. 1230. Journal of Medieval History, 31(4), 327–345.
Ozorhon, I. F., & Ozorhon, G. (2021). Rural architecture and sustainability: Learning from the past. Journal of Asian Rural Studies, 5(1), 30–47.
Penn, A., Hillier, B., Banister, D., & Xu, J. (1998). Configurational modelling of urban movement networks. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25(1), 59–84.
Rapoport, A. (1969). House Form and Culture. Prentice-Hall.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. Mcgrawhill international. New York.
Sazak, Ş. (1990). Belediye ve mücavir alanlar dışında kırsal alanlarda planlama süreci üzerine bir araştırma ve planlama için ussal bir yöntem önerisi. Mimar Sinan University, İstanbul.
Selman, P. (2006). Planning at the landscape scale. Routledge.
Sencer, Y. (1979). Türkiye’de kentleşme: Bir toplumsal ve kültürel değişme süreci (Vol. 345). Kültür Bakanlığı yayınları.
Sharp, T. (1946). The Anatomy of the Village. [With Illustrations and Plans.].
Tacoli, C. (1998). Rural-urban interactions: A guide to the literature. Environment and Urbanization, 10(1), 147–166.
Tanoğlu, A. (2010). İskan Coğrafyası: Esas Fikirler, Problemler ve Metod. Türkiyat Mecmuası, 11, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.18345/tm.91824
Taş, B. (2016). Türkiye’nin kırsal yerleşmeleri. Yeditepe Yayınevi.
Tian, G., Qiao, Z., & Gao, X. (2014). Rural settlement land dynamic modes and policy implications in Beijing metropolitan region, China. Habitat International, 44, 237–246.
Tombus, F. E., & Ozulu, I. M. (2007). Uzaktan algılama ve cografi bilgi sistemleri kullanılarak erozyon risk belirlemesine yeni bir yaklasım, Corum ili örnegi. TMMOB Harita ve Kadastro Mühendisleri Odası Ulusal Cografi Bilgi Sistemleri Kongresi, 30.
Wang, J., Georganos, S., Kuffer, M., Abascal, A., & Vanhuysse, S. (2022). On the knowledge gain of urban morphology from space. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 95, 101831.
Xiao, H., Xue, C., Yu, J., Yu, C., & Peng, G. (2023). Spatial Morphological Characteristics of Ethnic Villages in the Dadu River Basin, a Sino-Tibetan Area of Sichuan, China. Land, 12(9), 1662.
Yanbo, Q., Guanghui, J., Yuting, Y., Qiuyue, Z., Yuling, L., & Wenqiu, M. (2018). Multi-scale analysis on spatial morphology differentiation and formation mechanism of rural residential land: A case study in Shandong Province, China. Habitat International, 71, 135–146.
Yang, X., Kong, Z., & Li, X. (2019). Research on the spatial pattern of traditional villages based on spatial syntax: A case study of baishe village. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 295(3), 032071.
Yao, X., & Wu, D. (2023). Spatiotemporal Changes and Influencing Factors of Rural Settlements in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Region, 1990–2020. Land, 12(9), 1741.
Zhou, J., Lin, J., Cui, S., Qiu, Q., & Zhao, Q. (2013). Exploring the relationship between urban transportation energy consumption and transition of settlement morphology: A case study on Xiamen Island, China. Habitat International, 37, 70–79.
URL-1. https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/OECD_regional_typology_Nov2012.pdf (Accessed: 10.04.2023)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
COPYRIGHT POLICY
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.
6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.
ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning is an OAJ supported by 