Geographical planning of space quarterly journal

Geographical planning of space quarterly journal

Physical Vulnerability Comparative Analysis of the Gorgan City Center and peripheral texture against Earthquake

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Abdolreza Dadbood
Ali Zangi Abadi
Department of geography, University of Isfahan, Isfahan City, Iran
10.30488/gps.2021.176664.3017
Abstract
The most important factor in the urban textures vulnerability during an earthquake is the physical characteristics such as the age of the building, materials, number of floors, width and the degree of vulnerability. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is the vulnerability analysis of Gorgan texture in terms of physical indices and comparison of the its central and peripheral regions against the earthquake. In this research, cluster and Rao method (R.H.C) was used. The research statistical population consisted of 400 buildings in Gorgan which is determined by the Cochran formula.
The findings of the research show that Based on the results of regression correlation test, the relationship between the vulnerability variable and width of the passageway is direct and medium, with type of materials is strong direct, with the number of floors is strong direct. Finally, the relationship between the variable of vulnerability with the number of units in buildings is the direct and poor. Based on regression method, the building materials and number of floors, the age of the building, access to the passageway, and finally the number of residential units in the building have the greatest impact on physical texture vulnerability of the urban areas respectively.
The results of the physical vulnerability comparison of Gorgan city the central and peripheral textures indicate that the density average of residential units (equivalent to 1.92) is lower in the central texture. The age of the central texture building (more than 2/31) is higher. The floors of peripheral texture building (up to 1/29) are higher. In terms of unit’s accessibility index, the peripheral texture average is 2.33, so the buildings of this section have more accessible access to wider passages. The final index of the buildings vulnerability in the central and peripheral area indicates that the peripheral texture average is 2.42 and, consequently, the buildings of this section are less vulnerable.
Keywords
vulnerability
earthquake
central texture
peripheral texture
city of Gorgan
  1. صادقی، نوشین. بزی، خدارحم. خواجه شاهکوهی، علیرضا. رضایی، حامد. 1396. تحلیل برآورد آسیب‌پذیری مساکن شهری در برابر زلزله، مطالعه موردی: شهر گرگان، مجله آمایش جغرافیایی فضا (فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی دانشگاه گلستان)، 7(25): 88-73.
  2. صیامی، قدیر. لطیفی، غلامرضا. تقی­نژاد، کاظم. زاهدی کلاکی، ابراهیم. 1392. آسیب­پذیری پدافندی ساختار شهری با استفاده از تحلیل سلسله­ مراتبی AHP و GIS، مطالعه موردی: شهر گرگان، مجله آمایش جغرافیایی فضا(فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی دانشگاه گلستان)، 3(10):42-21.
  3. مهندسان مشاور شهرسازی و معماری پارت. 1390. طرح جامع شهر گرگان، وزارت راه و شهرسازی، اداره کل راه و شهرسازی استان گلستان، گرگان.
    1. Benton-Short, L.­, and Short, J.R. 2019. Cities and Nature. Translated by Hamed Abasi, Zohre Maryanaji, Abolfazl Meshkini and hafez Mahdnejad, Publication of Lorestan University.
    2. Chafe, Z. 2007. Reducing natural disaster risk in cities, State of The World: Our Urban Future. New York, Norton. 112–129.
    3. Chambers, L.W., Shimoda, F., Walter, S.D., Pickard, L., Hunter, B., Ford, J., Deivanayagam, N. and Cunningham, I. 1989. Estimating the burden of illness in an Ontario community with untreated drinking water and sewage disposal problems. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 80 (2):142-148.
    4. Cutter, S.L. 1996. Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Progress in Human Geography, 20 (4): 529-539.
    5. De Melo Branko, M., Suassuna, J., and Adler Vainsencher, S. 2005. Improving Access to Water Resources through Rainwater Harvesting as a Mitigation Measure: The case of the Brazilian Semi-Arid Region. In C. Emdad Haque (Ed.), Mitigation of Natural Hazards and Disasters: International Perspectives (pp. 62-78). Dordrecht: Springer.
    6. Gencer, E.A. 2013. The Interplay between Urban Development, Vulnerability, and Risk Management, Mediterranean Studies, 7, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-29470-9_2, the Author(s) 2013.
    7. Kumpulainen, S. 2006. Vulnerability Concepts in Hazard and Risk Assessment, Natural and Technological Hazards and Risks Affecting the Spatial Development of European Regions edited by Philipp Schmidt-Thomé, Geological Survey of Finland, Special Paper, 42: 65-74.
    8. Mahdavian, A. 2013. Seismic zoning of Golestan province. Journal of Earth Sciences, (89): 174-165.
    9. Mobaraki, O., and Kashaniasl, A. 2014. The Role of Urban Planning In Crisis Management with an Emphasis on Earthquakes,  (A Case Study of Ahar City),  International Journal of Basic Sciences & Applied Research, 3 (SP): 256-263.
    10. Motiram, B.H. 2014. Earthquake Risk Assessment, Loss Estimation and Vulnerability Mapping for Dehradun City, India. Master Thesis, Faculty of Geo-information Science and Earth Observation, University of Twente.
    11. Muller, A., Reiter, J., and Weiland, U. 2011. Assessment of urban vulnerability towards floods using an indicator-based approach – a case study for Santiago de Chile, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. (­11): 2107-2123.
    12. Pelling, M. 2003. The Vulnerability of Cities: Natural Disaster and Social Resilience. New York and London: Routledge.
    13. Rahman, N. 2014. Vulnerability Assessment of Earthquake and Fire Hazard and Formulating Risk Reduction Strategies at Community Level. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology.
    14. Selma, C. 2016. Seismic risk assessment at Emergency Limit Condition of urban neighborhoods: application to the Example District of Barcelona. Master Thesis in Civil Engineering, Department
      of Construction Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya under Erasmus Program.
    15. Servi, M. 2004. Assessment of Vulnerability to Earthquake Hazards Using Spatial Multi Criteria Analysis: Odunpazari, Eskisehir Case Study. The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University.
    16. Susman, P.O., Keefe, P., and Wisner, B. 1983. Global disasters: A radical interpretation. In: Hewitt, K., (Ed.). Interpretations of Calamity from the viewpoint of human ecology. Boston, Allen & Unwin. 263-283.
    17. Taylor J. 2015. A tale of two cities: comparing alternative approaches to reducing the vulnerability of riverbank communities in two Indonesian cities. Environment and Urbanization, 27(2): 621-636.
    18. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN/ISDR)­. 2004. Living with risk: a global review of disaster reduction initiatives. 2 vols. United Nations, Geneva.
    19. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN/ISDR). 2009. UNISDR terminology on disaster risk reduction. UN/ISDR, Geneva.
    20. World Bank (WB). 2010. Natural hazards, unnatural disasters: the economics of effective prevention. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington.
    21. Weakley, D. 2013.  Recognising Vulnerability and Resilience in Informal Settlements: The Case of Kya Sands. Johannesburg, South Africa.
    22. Zangi Abadi, A., Saniei, R., and Varesi, H.R. 2009. Statistical Analysis of Earthquake Risk in the Regions 11 and 12 of Tehran. MJSP. 13(2): 91-111.