Future Challenges in Sustainable Urban Planning & Territorial Management
Proceedings of the SUPTM 2022 conference
S. García-Ayllón
& J.L. Miralles Editors
edicionesUPCT
SUPTM 2022
CONFERENCE CHAIRS
S. García-AyllónTechnical University of Cartagena, Spain
&
J.L. Miralles
Technical University of Valencia, Spain
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
J. Radke, University of California Berkeley, USA P. Kyriakidis, Cyprus University of Technology, Cyprus
C. Llop, Technical University of Catalonia, Spain C.
Zoppi, University of Cagliari, Italy E. Gencer, University of Columbia, USA L.M. Valenzuela, University of Granada, Spain E. Wagemann, University Diego Portales, Chile S. Madrigal, University Ricardo Palma, Peru
I. Sánchez de Madariaga, Technical University of Madrid, Spain C. Bailly, ENSA Paris-Val de Seine, France
C. Szlafsztein, University Federal do Pará, Brazil J.P. Sanz, Technical University of Cartagena, Spain M. Taghavi, Technical and Vocational University, Iran
A. Salvati, Brunel University London, UK E. Gielen, Technical University of Valencia, Spain
F. de la Barrera, University of Concepción, Chile A. Serra-Llobet, University of California Berkeley, USA
Organised by Sciforum, Switzerland
Technical University of Cartagena, Spain
Sponsored by Cartagena Town Hall, Spain
Official College of Architects of the Region of Murcia
Official College of Civil Engineers, Canals and Ports of the Region of Murcia
Supporting publications Sustainability Urban Science
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Land
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Reconocimiento-No comercial- SinObraDerivada (by-nc-nd):
no se permite el uso comercial de la obra original ni la generación de obras derivadas.
http://es.creativecommons.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/by-nc-nd.eu_petit.png ISBN: 978-84-17853-50-1
Primera edición, 2022 [email protected] Tel. 968325908 30202, Cartagena Plaza del Hospital, 1 Ediciones UPCT
© 2022, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena
© 2022, Salvador García‐Ayllón Veintimilla & José Luis Miralles García, Editors
sustainability, the environment, urban studies and proper land‐use planning. That is why it is an honour for us to be able to host, as a scientific and university institution, this first international conference on the challenges of the 21st century in terms of urban planning and land management SUPTM 2022.
As one of the four technical universities in Spain, our students and researchers are strongly related to these disciplines from various careers and research programs. The design of cities, urban mobility, territorial and environmental planning, or the management of natural risks in matters such as flooding or coastal space, are disciplines in which our institution is a benchmark at national and international level, and in which we train numerous graduates each year, who then transfer their knowledge to their various professional fields.
Research in the scientific field of all these matters that are so important for the future of this planet is an obligation of our society that must be promoted by public administrations and passed on to companies through the transfer of knowledge. In this context, I reiterate the maximum commitment of the institution that I represent in these international knowledge exchange events, which enrich our researchers by allowing them to promote their work and learn about the work of others.
I trust that this is no more than the first step of meetings that will be repeated in the future, allowing us to help advance the sustainable development goals of our planet with their results.
Beatriz Miguel
Rector of the Technical University of Cartagena
It is a pride for the city of Cartagena to host this first international conference on challenges in urban planning and land management. The city of Cartagena, as the cradle of a three‐thousand‐year‐old civilization, is a historical reference in terms of architecture and urban planning. However, we are not resigned to living from our past, but rather we are committed to a future in which innovation and research are the spearhead to help move our society forward.
In this sense, our city is a reference in sustainable urban mobility, environmental planning and innovative urban planning, incorporating researchers and professionals of the highest prestige into our projects. These projects have placed our city in a vanguard position in many of the topics that will be discussed during these days in this congress. In this sense, I am convinced that the results of this meeting will be very useful and will help our cities and territories to advance along the path of sustainable development.
I am confident that the success of this first call is only the beginning of new meetings in the future that will consolidate our city as a benchmark in terms of research on urban planning and land‐use planning. And I am sure that in the near future, the more than 200 researchers from the five continents who will meet electronically these days, due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, will be able to come and see our wonderful city in person at the next edition of the congress, which we will be happy to invite you to.
Noelia Arroyo Mayor of Cartagena
This book includes the proceedings of the 1st international Conference on Future Challenges in Sustainable Urban Planning & Territorial Management held on January 17‐19, 2022.
Urban planning is an essential tool in our global society’s journey towards sustainability. This tool is as important as the territorial management to execute the plans. Both planning and management must be efficient to achieve the goal of sustainability within the general framework of Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. There is no B planet, so identifying urban & territorial challenges in our territories such as reaching sustainable mobility, diagnosing natural hazards and controlling land resource consumption is mandatory for our 21st century generation. Planning land uses which are compatible with the ecosystem services of the territory and managing them by public‐private cooperation systems is a vast challenge for our global society. Human activities do not very frequently include the maintaining of ecosystem services of the territory among their objectives. Therefore, this field of research must help to guarantee the maintenance of natural resources, also called Natural Capital, necessary for social and economic activities of our global society. This conference aims to be a space to share research work, ideas, experiences, projects, etc. in this field of knowledge. We seek to enhance the concept that planning and management are subjects which include technological and social matters and their own methodologies. Laws, rules, and cultures of different countries around the world are, or can be, very diverse. But there is only one planet.
Technologies are shared, methodologies to analyze territories are also communal to share experiences about the global goal of sustainability, so these events are a necessary way to build our joint future. We trust that the success of this first edition of the SUPTM conference (which has been attended by more than 200 researchers from the five continents) will be an opening step towards international collaboration and the dissemination of knowledge that is so important in this field of urban planning and territorial management. Finally, the chairs would like to acknowledge MDPI and the Sciforum organization for inviting us to manage this conference, and also the Technical University of Cartagena and its city Town Hall for their interest and support in this event.
Salvador García‐Ayllón & José Luis Miralles Chairs of the SUPTM 2022 conference
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings
CONTENTS
INSTITUTIONAL GREETINGS
Beatriz Miguel. Rector of the Technical University of Cartagena Noelia Arroyo. Mayor of the city of Cartagena
PREFACE
Salvador García-Ayllón & José Luis Miralles. Chairs of the SUPTM 2022 conference
KEYNOTE SPEAKERS
Prof. Albert Saiz. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (opening lecture) Prof. Fernando Gaja. Polytechnic University of Valencia (closure lecture)
CONFERENCE SESSIONS
CITY PLANNING SESSIONS
Ola Qasseer. The Role of Transportation Networks in Enforcing the City Centrality; A case study of Budapest City.
Benjamin Obe. A Systematic Review of Urban Heat Islands Studies in West Africa.
Maryam Fayyaz, Esther González-González, Soledad Nogués. Autonomous vehicles in sustainable cities: Reclaiming public spaces for people.
Mahdi Shakibamanesh. An introduction to Smart City in the service of Urban Crisis Management.
Ekaterina Kubyshkina, Egor Kotov. Peak-load pricing and justice in public transport: using smart-card data for impact assessment of Early Bird discount in Moscow Metro.
Moharraf Hossain, Ashik Ali Murad, Tasnim Jahan, Ferdous Farhana Huq, Muhaiminul Islam. The impact of urban sprawl in sub urban area of Rajshahi: A study in Kashiadanga area.
Maria-Jose Marquez-Ballesteros, Daniel Navas-Carrillo. Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans in Spain: a critical analysis.
Azra Zainab Shabbir Ahamed. Provisions for Urban Social Sustainability in City Planning: A conceptual framework.
Salvador García-Ayllón. New perspectives for the diagnosis and planning of urban mobility after COVID- 19: the case study of Cartagena.
Shradha Chandan, Swati Sharma, Satish Pipralia, Ashwani Kumar. Influence of Tourist Behavior Mapping in the Development of Pilgrim Cities.
Márton Bagyura. Urban planning in a Hungarian town after the red sludge disaster.
Raúl Gálvez Tirado, Susy Milagros Torres Chicoma. Open infrastructure’s methodology to revitalize the Chiclayo’s monumental urban area (Peru).
Iveth Rodríguez De La Rosa, Eric Gielen, José-Sergio Palencia-Jiménez. Relationships between urban form and mobility: gender and transport mode.
Mara Ladu, Ginevra Balletto, Alessandra Milesi, Giuseppe Borruso, Gianfranco Fancello. Urban enclaves and accessibility. The role of walkability in sustainable urban mobility planning.
Simone Corrado, Luigi Santopietro, Francesco Scorza. Municipal climate adaptation plans: an assessment of the benefit of Nature-Based Solutions for urban local flooding mitigation.
Gulpreet Kaur, Sakshi Sahni. Public Perception and Quality of Public Open Spaces- Case Study of City and Community Level Parks in Amritsar City.
TERRITORIAL MANAGEMENT SESSIONS
Alessandro Marucci, Lorena Fiorini, Lucia Saganeiti, Rosa Marina Donolo.Indicators for monitoring the Sustainability of Transformations in Territorial Planning.
Josep Lluís Miralles-Garcia. The management of Natural Capital. The case of Valencian Country Gabriela Adriana Munguía Uribe, Pedro Joaquín Gutiérrez Yurrita. Making sense of place in community gardens in Urban Landscape of Mexico City.
Elena Enciso. The concept of migratory emergency in territorial and urban planning: analysis of the Spanish Mediterranean coast.
José Sergio Palencia, Eric Gielen, Rafael Ramón Temes, Josep Lluís Miralles. Minimization of the territorial impact of housing on non-urban land in areas affected by flood hazard.
Anna Serra-Llobet, John Radke. From epic wildfires to epic flash floods: Rethinking environmental planning in an era of extremes.
Francisco Gómez, Salvador García-Ayllón. Analysis of the relationship between coastal development and the alteration of beach shorelines: a retrospective view based on spatial indicators.
Ginevra Balletto, Mara Ladu, Alessandra Milesi, Tiziana Campisi, Giuseppe Borruso. Walkability and city users. Critical analysis of opportunities and risks.
Alfonso Bernal, Pedro Sánchez, Fernando Miguel García, Marcos Ros, María José Silvente.
Urban planning facing to dispersion in the traditional huertas of the Region de Murcia.
María del Mar Cobo. Rooting: peri-urban agroecology through territorial planning.
Ángela Franco, Salvador García-Ayllón. Urban policies as a factor of vulnerability to flooding in Mediterranean coastal areas: retrospective spatial analysis of the case study of the Region of Murcia.
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SESSIONS
Miguel Angel Ajuriaguerra, Alba Ramírez. The recovery of non-residential vacant plots in southern Madrid districts through green infrastructure implementation.
Anissa Bellil. Assessing the ecological relevance of conservation planning using landscape graph modelling.
Federica Isola, Federica Leone, Corrado Zoppi. Ecological corridors and landscape planning: A study to develop a regional network of protected areas in Sardinia (Italy).
Francesco Zullo, Bernardino Romano, Cristina Montaldi, Chiara Cattani. Ecological connectivity efficiency: a study for Maiella National Park and Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park.
Rafael Córdoba, Lucas Martí. Ecosystem Vulnerability due to Planning. The role of regulatory ecosystem contributions in the land planning.
Francesca Leccis. Beyond environmental protection and conservation: local-level implementation of the 2030 Agenda to deliver universal goals and targets. Lessons from Sardinia, Italy.
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings
Luigi Santopietro, Francesco Scorza. Small CoM Municipalities and local climate-change responsive strategies.
Enrique Mínguez. Strategies for the renaturalization of tourist destinations: La Manga del Mar Menor (Spain).
Andreea Melinescu. Residents 'perception and preferences with regard to fruit species in public spaces and private gardens.
Gaia Turchetti. Environmental monitoring of the historic city.
Maria José Aguilar, Eric Gielen, María Concepción Vallés, Francisco Galiana, Gabriel Riutort- Mayol, Yaiza Pérez. Evaluating limiting factors for people with disabilities using mobility assistive technologies to enjoy National Parks - Comparative findings between Canada and Spain.
Abdulrahman A. Zawawi, Nicole Porter, Christopher D. Ives. What influences the use of greenways as active transportation corridors?
Alba Cristina Núñez Basantes. The relationship between built environment and Station boargings for Quito’s BRT.
Anjali Saraswat, Satish Pipralia, Ashwani Kumar. Sustainable Urbanisation: An Ecosystems Approach towards Future cities.
Ginevra Balletto, Filippo Pavesi, Anna Richiedei, Michèle Pezzagno. Method to Support Urban Planning for circular economy of aggregates (Sand/Gravel).
Mara Ladu, Martina Marras. Nature protection and local development: A methodological study implemented with reference to a natural park located in Sardinia (Italy).
Shu-Hui Hung, Ju Hui Hsu. Using the Artificial Intelligence Ecosystem Services (ARIES) model to explore the value of socio-economic ecosystems using the Jinshan Qingshui Wetland in Northern Taiwan as a case study.
SPATIAL ANALYSIS SESSIONS
Shruti Sidhu. Analysis of land development potential using remote sensing for Kangra District, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Preeti Jaiswal, Pooja Nigam, Satish Pipralia. Evaluating Land Valuation Techniques and Urban Development Practices in India.
Muhammad Mainuddin Patwary. Spatial-temporal analysis of urban eco-environmental quality of an urban area using geo-spatial techniques: The case of Dhaka megacity, Bangladesh.
Montaña Jiménez-Espada. Geographical accessibility by bus to the University Hospital of Cáceres by means of GIS.
Dan Narita. Designing a Nature-based Transition for In-between Territories in the Greater Bay Area.
Angela Pilogallo, Francesco Scorza. Ecosystem Services Multifunctionality: an analytical framework to support sustainable spatial planning. Insights from the Italian case study.
Álvaro Bernabeu-Bautista, Mariana Huskinson, Leticia Serrano-Estrada. Reading urban transformation based on geolocated crowdsourced data.
Attila Buzási, Berttina Szimonetta Jäger, Olivér Hortay. Analyzing and mapping heatwave vulnerability and urban sustainability - the case of largest Hungarian cities.
Lucia Chieffallo, Annunziata Palermo, Maria Francesca Viapiana. Spatial analysis for territorial marginality mapping. GIS-based application to the case of southern and insular Italy.
Hani Amir Aouissi, Alexandru-Ionut Petrisor, Aissam Gaagai, Mostefa Ababsa, Feriel Kheira Kebaili. Geo-statistical Approaches to Study the Influence of Land Use on Avifauna in North Africa.
Gloria Martínez. Analysis and diagnostic tools to improve governance in the context of urban planning and territorial management.
Sabrina Lai. Synergies and trade-offs in ecosystem services’ provision in Sardinia (Italy): A planning- oriented spatial assessment.
MISCELLANEOUS SESSIONS
Margarita Martínez-Díaz. The gender perspective in sustainable urban planning.
Mai Adel Marzouk. Applicability of PV Rooftops Versus Agriculture Rooftops in the Residential Buildings of Nasr City, Cairo.
Mariana Huskinson, Álvaro Bernabeu-Bautista, Leticia Serrano-Estrada. A mixed-source approach to public participation for assessing urban accessibility of neighbourhood public spaces.
Shu-Hui Hung, Yi-Ting Wang. Implementing the 3E assessment model of sustainable development to investigate coastal pollution management: using PET recycling (bottle-to-fiber) as a case study.
Neginsadat Mirvahedi, Abbas Doorudinia. Three Decades of Research in Human mobility: A Scientometric Analysis.
Ahmed Saleh. Evaluation of heavy metals pollution in the soil of Helwan, Cairo, Egypt using magnetic and chemical analysis techniques.
Opening Lecture
Cities, Data, and Urban Planning After the Deluge
Thank you for the opportunity to open the SUPTM 2022 conference. The list of papers is impressive and bodes very well for the future of research endeavors in planning and sustainable urban development. It is comforting to see the scientific process relentlessly going on, despite the continued global pandemic.
These are times where research and data work about the nature of cities and potential solutions to urban environmental challenges are more important than ever.
The covid‐19 pandemic has exposed very clearly how fragile current economic and social structures can be when they are hit by major shocks. We need to do better. The scientific process will be of critical importance to resolve the outstanding urban challenges of the 21st century—as it has been recently in finding a vaccine and potential treatments for the global pandemic.
In order to move our societies, economies, and communities forward, the academic disciplines that encompass planning, urban sustainability, the environment, architecture, engineering, and the social sciences are as critical as those conducting health and medical studies. As we are now ascertaining, a full solution to the covid‐19 pandemic—and the urban economic and environmental challenges that we face in the 21st Century—will require a full understanding of: the economic inequalities that limit the global access to remedies; the urban social interactions that mediate the diffusion of communicable diseases or, for instance, the adoption of innovations; how human behavior responds to critical situations; and many other issues.
And yet—as we are also seeing with covid‐19—we will not be able to deploy one‐size‐fits‐all solutions to current and upcoming urban challenges.
Developed, developing, and emerging countries will require different research and policy approaches. This will imply different priority lists in the deployment of human resources and budgets by region. Even within a level of economic development, contextual information about historic, cultural, geographic, and economic conditions will be of paramount importance in determining which tools of the planning toolbox should be used in each city and point of time. It is therefore refreshing to see the diversity in geographic coverage and thematic scope of the contributions to the conference.
The challenges confronted by urban planners in the 21st century are many, including: the current—and future—global pandemics; environmental change and associated disasters; pollution; traffic; housing affordability;
economic stagnation; loss of community and of historical character;
storage of data. Big data is, indeed, improving our ability to measure and
perceive urban and environmental change. It may also—writing in optimistic hope—afford us a better chance to improve policy and industrial practices before it is too late. One of the themes in the conference is, indeed, the use of novel data sources to understand, measure, explain, and/or to act upon urbanistic and environmental phenomena. The amount and the quality of data work in the proceedings is inspiring, and will certainly spur more applied work in these areas. Even more promisingly, I can see the potential for direct policy implementation of many ideas and methods contained in the papers presented herein.
While the use of big data becomes prevalent—or more generally, the proliferation of datasets with granular or geo‐localized information grows—
we may all want to collaborate in furthering a new data culture that helps us achieve societal change. I humbly offer the following thoughts related to data use and its dissemination in urbanism:
1. All of us in the research and policy communities should aim to democratize the access to and usability of data. The scientific process is akin to a Wikipedia, where individual contributions are small, but the overall endeavor reaches encyclopedic proportions. The open‐source movement parallels this feature of the scientific process. It would be great to see some of the urban datasets presented in the conference reaching the public domain.
2. Public disinformation is a major societal problem. There are great opportunities for us studying urbanism to better educate the public using the new and multiple data sources that we have now access to. I am looking forward to the results and learning from this and future conferences to find their way to the public and enlighten their views.
3. Some of the data that we generate in the study of urbanism can spur actionable policies or triple‐bottom business applications. Or it can be used to assist in community‐based collective‐action processes. Many of the practical and focused contributions in these proceeding exemplify well this potential.
4. Scientists should progressively work more and more with practitioners in assisting them deploy data science techniques to design automated urbanistic solutions that rely on data feedback loops. For instance, sensors can measure pedestrian traffic growth in real time and behavioral interventions—relying on randomized treatment evaluations—can be designed to adapt accordingly—e.g. by sending more police presence to the area.
There is much knowledge in the proceedings of the SUPTM 2022 conference
presented herein. I am proud to preface these exciting papers, and looking forward to learn much from them.
Albert Saiz
Daniel Rose Associate Professor of Urban Economics and Real Estate Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Let us accept, as a working hypothesis, that industrial society is facing a crucial and unusual challenge: that of replacing the use of fossil energy resources with other recyclable and carbon neutral ones, within the framework of a new sustainable productive and social model.
This necessary and unpostponable transition to a post‐fossil energy society, which has been demanded for decades, has come to coincide with a fact that until recently was unthinkable: that of a serious pandemic, Covid‐19, which is altering production processes and consolidated social patterns. The concurrence of both changes will give rise to a scenario that we can call Post, both Post‐Fossil and Post‐Covid, in which all human activities will have to be rethought.
When it comes to urban planning, it is worth wondering what changes it will have to face in order to continue to be useful and viable in a society that will be very different from the one in which it arose. We might even go further and question whether it will even be able to adapt and survive. Planning, as we handle it today, is an instrument that was born and developed in the industrial society with the aim of regulating the great urban expansion of the 19th and 20th centuries. Its most elaborate, canonical expression, was that of the Structural Plans, conceived and created to organise growth, an instrument that must be reformulated in depth. It is on them that we will focus our reflection.
In a horizon without growth, and this is a second hypothesis that we adopt, that of the end of growth, could structural plans have some meaning and function? Will they be able to evolve and adapt to the needs of the new post‐
society, or by their origin and intrinsic characteristics are they doomed to extinction?
The difficulties that Urbanism is going through, aggravated in the current context, are certainly not new. Since the 1970s, it has been the target of harsh criticism, even disqualifications that went so far as to openly advocate its abandonment and its replacement by concrete and direct works projects with a strong architectural or engineering component. In its beginnings, it was a professional controversy that scarcely entered into considerations of a social or economic nature; it was more a debate among and for architects.
It was not the only challenge. Simultaneously, others were formulated that questioned it, both from a political point of view (from neo‐liberal positions) and from more strictly disciplinary approaches. The latter rejected planning by identifying it with zoning, the instrument par excellence of rationalist or functionalist modernist planning.
Nevertheless, the current challenges are of a different nature. They are not due to professional controversies that could be described as internal, but derive from external uncertainties, processes of social change or environmental challenges, which are affecting an activity based on assumptions that are rapidly losing their meaning.
We will examine the multiple crises and threats affecting planning, as the canonical form of urban intervention in modernity, and then consider possible post‐scenarios and the role that urban planning could play in this transition to a new system.
Fernando Gaja i Díaz
Urban Planner & Associate Professor of the Polytechnic University of Valencia
CITY PLANNING SESSIONS
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings
SUPTM conference proceedings 2022 https://doi.org/10.31428/10317/10490 http://hdl.handle.net/10317/10490
Proceedings
The Role of Transportation Networks in enforcing the City Centrality: A Case Study of Budapest City
Ola Qasseer 1,*
1 ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Institute of Geography and Earth Sciences, Department of Regional Sci‐
ence, Budapest, Hungary; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]
With the increased importance of urban areas; cities have become the major centers of human activ‐
ities. This has resulted in high levels of centrality in urban areas and has caused a rapidly increasing population. The development of transportation systems and the distribution of their networks affect this centrality by either enforcing or weakening it. Budapest city plays a major central role in Hun‐
gary. However, how does the distribution of transportation networks in Budapest affect its central‐
ity? Does it influence the centrality level among various places in Budapest? This proposal attempts to find answers through measuring the centrality level according to the transportation network, by applying network analysis to determine the different levels of centrality in Budapest city. These measurements will help in understanding the role of transportation systems in the distribution of different activities inside the city, which will be important to develop transportation networks that offer more balance between different urban areas.
Keywords: City centrality; transportation systems; transportation networks; network analysis
1. Theoretical background 1.1 The centrality of urban areas
Urban areas could be described as a concentrated human settlement [1], aggregation with a specified number of inhabitants [2], centers with a specified population density [3], or agglomerated centers that provide job opportunities [4]. Cities are a complex compo‐
nent of human activities including commercial, touristic, and cultural events [5]. They have been affected by the industrial age and separated from agricultural work which led more working‐class populations to concentrate and settle in these urban areas [6], and more numbers of urban residents [7], with more accessible possibilities for services and job opportunities that are supported by transportation systems [7]. The need for supplies in these new cities was encouraged by transportation networks. The development of these networks was very critical to the urbanization process [8]. Migration is a key factor in increasing urbanization [8, 9] In other words, the processes of concentration and the ex‐
pansion of surrounding areas were a result of rural‐urban migration which increased the urban population with the newcomers [10], who are “pulled into the city or pushed out of the countryside” [11].
The idea of centrality deals with the effect of the geographical location of a specific area in the city [12], due to the spatial concentration in the central parts of urban areas [13]. In simple words, a place is more central if it is geographically closer to other parts of the city than other places [14]. The level of centrality is affected by the proximity, accessi‐
bility, or position of the node [15]. This concept is related to the level and number of
Citation: Qasseer, O.,2022, The Role of Transportation Networks in en‐
forcing the City Centrality; A case study of Budapest City . SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings sciforum‐
054261.
https://doi.org/10.31428/10317/10490 Publisher’s Note: UPCT and Scifo‐
rum stays neutral with regard to ju‐
risdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/license s/by/4.0/).
activities in a specific urban place [16]. Accessibility and the characteristics of transporta‐
tion systems affect the centrality level [10] and the attractiveness of a specific place [17].
1.2 The role of transportation networks in enforcing centrality
Urban transportation moves people and goods among different places causing sev‐
eral effects on the city structure and land‐use systems [18, 19]. The basic role of transpor‐
tation is to overcome spaces and facilitate the mobility of people, goods, and information [19]. As the transportation network is one of the infrastructure networks in the city [20], its distribution controls the accessibility level and the centralization or decentralization of specific areas [21]. On the other hand, we could evaluate the efficiency of the transporta‐
tion networks depending on measuring the level of centrality [22]. In this way, transpor‐
tation systems have affected the spatial organization of urban areas [23]. They also have affected the urban form and function [24]. In this regard, accessibility plays a major role in the distribution and development of transportation systems [25]. People are more likely to live in places that ensure a high level of connection with their main destinations. The higher connection a place has, the more centralized it becomes and vice versa. Geograph‐
ical locations and the development of transportation systems affect the accessibility level by enforcing the central positions for some areas and resulting in the peripheral locations for other places [21].
2. Case study: Budapest city
The chosen case study is Budapest; the capital city of Hungary and its biggest city with a population of 1.7 million. Danube river divides it into two sides; Buda and Pest which were merged in 1873 with Óbuda to form the city of Budapest [26]. The public transportation systems of Budapest are controlled by “BKK Centre for Budapest Transport”. The public transportation network in Budapest consists of metros, trams, buses, trolleybuses, and suburban trains besides the regional buses and trains. This net‐
work connects Budapest city and its agglomerations [27].
3. Methodology: measuring centrality
This proposal presents an example of measuring centrality and analyzing the trans‐
portation network as a step for achieving this analysis in more detail after gathering the whole needed data. Regarding that, the proposed method will apply two measurements of centrality; degree centrality and closeness centrality, on the public transportation net‐
work in Budapest. In future research this will be extended to contain trains, regional buses networks, and the traffic of private cars, to have more accurate data for measuring cen‐
trality.
Measuring centrality starts with building the network by specifying the nodes and edges. In the proposed case study; each intersection between different public transporta‐
tion routes is considered as a node and the line that is connected between two different nodes is considered as an edge. Building the network will be accompanied by achieving network corrections to avoid interruptions or overlapping within the network. This step is followed by measuring degree centrality which represents the number of connections of each node, and closeness centrality which represents how much a node is close to other nodes in the network. These two measurements will help in specifying the most central nodes in the network to show an example of the effect of transportation networks in en‐
forcing or weakening the centrality of different urban areas.
4. Results: the centrality of the public transportation network in Budapest
The analyzed network of public transportation; which connects different urban places in Budapest city and connects Budapest city with its agglomerations, consists of 1501 nodes and 1500 edges. The analysis shows varying levels of centrality among
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings sciforum‐054261
different areas of the network depending on the location of the node and the number of connected routes; as shown in Figure 1.
(a) (b)
Figure 1. The centrality of the public transportation network in Budapest: (a) Degree centrality; (b) Closeness Centrality.
Both measurements; degree centrality and closeness centrality show high levels in the central districts of Budapest where the major urban activities and major centers are located. In addition to high levels in the subcenters to the north, southeast, and southwest of Budapest. On the other hand, the measurements show low levels of centrality in other parts of Budapest. This difference is related to the urban structure of Budapest city and its growth pattern. It shows unbalanced levels of centrality among different urban areas which causes many problems to the urban environment. However, dealing with transpor‐
tation networks as a tool to solve centrality problems and achieve more balance between different urban areas could help in improving the city and avoiding possible problems in the future development plans.
To achieve this improvement and enhance the proposed scenarios of the city devel‐
opment, more detailed centrality measurements will be conducted. Centrality measure‐
ments will also include betweenness and straightness centrality. All transportation net‐
works, the number of passengers, and the frequency of each trip will be taken into con‐
sideration. Achieving this will help in presenting a more accurate perception of the cur‐
rent situation and more understanding of the role of transportation systems. Understand‐
ing these issues will be useful to improve the current urban situation and build more sta‐
ble plans for the city to support its development towards sustainability and build sustain‐
able urban mobility.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: The author would like to thank Dr. Gábor Szalkai for supervising this research which is a part of a Ph.D. work, and the Center for Budapest Transport (BKK) for the useful data which they provided. The author would also like to thank Tempus Public Foundation for providing the Stipendium Hungaricum Scholarship.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
1. Kuper, A.; Kuper, J. The social science encyclopedia: (vol 1). 3rd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, 2004. doi: 10.4324/9780203496169.
2. Maunier, R. The Definition of the City. Am J Sociol 1910, 15, 536–48.
3. Ofem, B.I. A Review of the Criteria for Defining Urban Areas in Nigeria. J Hum Ecol 2012, 37, 167–71.
doi:10.1080/09709274.2012.11906461.
4. INSEE: The National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies. Urban area: Definition. Available online: https://www.in‐
see.fr/en/metadonnees/definition/c2070. Accessed on 18 Aug 2021.
5. Neal, Z.P. The Connected City: How Networks are Shaping the Modern Metropolis; Routledge: New York, NY, 2012. doi:
10.4324/9780203101728.
6. Gregory, D.; Johnston, R.; Pratt, G.; Watts, M.J.; Whatmore, S. The dictionary of human geography. 5th ed.; Blackwell Publishing Ltd: Hoboken, New Jersey, 2009.
7. Frey, W.H.; Zimmer, Z. Defining the City. In Handbook of Urban Studies; Paddison, R., Eds.; SAGE Publications Ltd: London, UK, 2001, pp. 14–35. doi: 10.4135/9781848608375.n2.
8. Knox, P.L. Urbanization. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography; Kitchin, R., Thrift, N., Eds.; Elsevier, 2009, pp. 112–8.
doi: 10.1016/B978‐008044910‐4.01108‐1.
9. Global Migration Data Portal. Urbanization and migration. Available online: https://www.migrationdataportal.org/themes/ur‐
banisation‐et‐migration. Accessed on 25 Aug 2021.
10. Abdullahi, S.; Pradhan, B.; Al‐sharif, A.A. Introduction to Urban Growth and Expansion. In Spatial Modeling and Assessment of Urban Form; Pradhan, B., Eds.; Springer: Serdang, Malaysia, 2017, pp. 3–15. doi: 10.1007/978‐3‐319‐54217‐1_1.
11. Dufhues, T.; Buchenrieder, G.; Sun, Z. Exploring Policy Options in Regulating Rural–Urban Migration with a Bayesian Net‐
work: A Case Study in Kazakhstan. Eur J Dev Res 2021, 33, 553–77. doi:10.1057/s41287‐020‐00280‐1.
12. Agryzkov, T.; Tortosa, L.; Vicent, J.F.; Wilson, R. A centrality measure for urban networks based on the eigenvector centrality concept. Environ Plan B Urban Anal City Sci 2017, 46, 668–89. doi: 10.1177/2399808317724444.
13. Bunting, T.E.; Filion, P.; Priston, H. Changing patterns of residential centrality: Population and household shift in large Cana‐
dian CMAs, 1971‐1996. Cah Geogr Que 2000, 44, 341–61. doi:10.7202/022925ar.
14. Li, J.; Qian, J.; Liu, Y. A Novel Analysis Method of Geographical Centrality Based on Space of Flows. ISPRS Int J Geo‐Information 2017, 6, 153. doi:10.3390/ijgi6050153.
15. Strano, E.; Viana, M.; Costa, L. da. F.; Cardillo, A.; Porta, S.; Latora, V. Urban street networks, a comparative analysis of ten European cities. Environ Plan B Plan Des 2013, 40, 1071–86. doi:10.1068/b38216.
16. Cutini, V. Centrality and land use: Three case studies on the configurational hypothesis. CyberGeo Eur J Geogr 2001, 188. doi:
10.4000/cybergeo.3936.
17. Banister, D.; Lichfield, N. The Key Issues in Transport and Urban Development. In Transport and Urban Development; Banister D., Eds.; E & FN Spon: London, UK, 1995, pp. 1–16.
18. Shaw, S‐L. Transportation and Land Use. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography; Castree, N., Crang, M., Domosh, M., Eds.; Elsevier, 2009, pp. 470–5. doi: 10.1016/B978‐008044910‐4.01038‐5
19. Rodrigue, J‐P.; Comtois, C.; Slack, B. The Geography of Transport Systems. 3rd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, 2013. doi:
10.4324/9780203371183.
20. Monclús, J. Urban Transport and Technological Urbanism. In Urban Visions: From Planning Culture to Landscape Urbanism; Me‐
dina Díez, C., Monclús, J., Eds., Spriger: Cham, Switzerland, 2017, pp. 187–96. doi: 10.1007/978‐3‐319‐59047‐9_18.
21. Gutierrez, J. Transport and Accessibility. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography; Castree, N., Crang, M., Domosh, M., Eds.; Elsevier, 2009, pp. 410–7. doi: 10.1016/B978‐008044910‐4.01030‐0.
22. Crucitti, P.; Latora, V.; Porta, S. Centrality in networks of urban streets. Chaos 2006, 16, 1–9. doi:10.1063/1.2150162.
23. Wegener, M. Accessibility and Development Impacts. In Transport and Urban Development; Banister D., Eds.; E & FN Spon:
London, UK, 1995, pp. 157–61.
24. Herbert, D.; Thomas, C. Cities In Space: City as Place. 3rd ed.; David Fulton Publishers: London, UK, 1997. doi:
10.4324/9781315067766.
25. Lecompte, M.C; Bocarejo, S. JP. Transport systems and their impact con gender equity. Transportation Research Procedia 2017, 25, 4245‐57. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.230
26. Tóth‐Ronkay, M., Bajor, Z., Bárány, A., Földvári, G., Görföl, T., Halpern, B., et al. Budapest. In Vertebrates and Invertebrates of European Cities:Selected Non‐Avian Fauna; Springer: New York, NY, 2015. pp. 27–73. doi: 10.1007/978‐1‐4939‐1698‐6_2%0A.
27. Budapesti Közlekedési Központ. Available online: https://bkk.hu/en/. Accessed on 8 Dec 2021.
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings
SUPTM conference proceedings 2022 https://doi.org/10.31428/10317/10597 http://hdl.handle.net/10317/10597
Proceedings
A Systematic Review of Urban Heat Island Studies in West Africa
Benjamin Obe 1,* and Tobi Morakinyo 1,
1 University College Dublin; [email protected]
1 University College Dublin; [email protected]
* Correspondence: benjamin.obe@ucdconnect.; Tel.: (+353899644549)
Abstract
This study critically and systematically reviews the state‐of‐the‐art on UHI research in west Africa region to identify and bridge the gap with other global literature. Focusing on 48 studies extracted through a laid down protocol, we reviewed, integrated and analysed in detail the causative factors of UHI, methods of measurement, the intensities, variabilities, impacts and mitigation strategies while critiquing the methods and limitations of the studies. Of the 16 countries in the region, UHI‐related research have been conducted in only 5 countries, indicating a wide knowledge gap. Also, inconsistencies in the scale of study, data collection methods and analysis were observed, indicating that studies have not used a universal and specific protocol to define the choice of location for an urban and a rural area.
Keywords: Urban Heat Island, west Africa, Temperature, Review, systematically
1. Introduction
Due to its geographical location, background climate and recent large‐scale urban sprawl as well as high poverty level, west Africa is most susceptible to the impact of climate change such as extreme heat [1]. A slight increase in temperature could trigger the thermal condition to be above the heat‐health threshold. For example, a recent study by [2] in Kumasi, Ghana, found relatively higher Urban Heat Island Intensity(UHII) than those experience in European cities during the 2016 heatwave indicating the extent of Urban Heat Islands (UHI) in west Africa region. The problem will become more intense and frequent in the future based on scientistsʹ projections e.g [3]–[5]. Although, the urban transition in west African cities offers tremendous social and infrastructural development opportunities. This is however made possible at the expense of the local climate. Even though human presence is part of nature, sustainable cities will be made possible if human activities respect the ecological system. The environmental equilibriums have recently been challenged with the pace of urbanization in Africa that exceeds the critical value of population density.
Despite all these, unfortunately, the understanding of the dynamics of Urban Heat Island (UHI) menace is still limited over this region [6]. This review article attempts to collate existing knowledge on the subject within west Africa. The specific goal is to
Citation: Obe, B. and Morakinyo, T., 2022, A Systematic Review of Urban Heat Island Studies in West Africa.
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings sciforum‐052966.
https://doi.org/10.31428/10317/10597
Publisher’s Note: UPCT and Scifo‐
rum stays neutral with regard to ju‐
risdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/license s/by/4.0/).
identify critical gaps in UHI studies and the state‐of‐the‐art methodologies and define some key research questions to accommodate future studies to achieve sustainable and resilient cities. To achieve this, we exhaustively review various studies on UHI in west Africa from 1985 to 2021 to understand the trend of existing studies with respect to the determining factors, adopted methods of measurement, the intensity and variability, impacts and mitigation strategies of UHI. The review will also tend to find topics and gaps that need more attention from researchers to inspire proactive urban climate actions in the future.
2. Geography and climate of the study area 2.1 Study Area
Figure 1. Geographical map of west Africa.
The systematic review considers UHI studies written in English over 16 countries in the region, covering a landmass of approximately 6 million km2 and an estimated population of 381 million people [7].
2.2 Literature search and screening
Different databases (Scopus, Google Scholar and web of science) were employed for an intensive literature search. Search terms such as Urban climate, Urban Heat Island, Heat stress, and Land surface temperature were separately combined with west African countryʹs names. Since this systematic review focuses on Urban Heat Island over the west African domain, we limit the findings to cities within the domain and also set a subfield category using the online database. The search result returned 244 articles.
After the initial online extraction, a rigorous manual check was performed by reading the abstract and assessing whether the articles were relevant to the scope of the review. For an article to be selected, it must address the research objectives stated above; that is, it must address either of UHI development, measurements, characteristics, causes and impacts and mitigation strategies and changes in land use and surface composition in relation to Land Surface Temperature (LST. We however selected only studies written in English. Even with this broader scope, only 48 articles were selected and reviewed with case studies over 21 cities in west Africa.
SUPTM 2022 conference proceedings sciforum‐052966
3. Results and Discussion
Whereas a Canopy Layer Urban Heat Island (CUHI) is based on the air temperature anomaly in the urban area, a Surface Urban Heat Island (SUHI) is based on the Land Surface Temperature (LST) anomaly in the urban areas in comparison to a rural area.
A surface review of the 48 selected articles showed that the articles could broadly be classified into 3 groups defined by the type of UHI considered and focus of the study;
approximately 58.3% focused on SUHI, 35.4% considered CUHI and approximately 12.5% focused on UHI mitigation potentials with green infrastructures.
For studies in the SUHI group, there are two sub‐categories: those studies that really investigated SUHI based on the traditional definition of differential LST between a urban and a defined rural reference area. Only 7 (25%) of the 28 SUHI studies could be classified into this category. Whereas 21 studies only used LST as a proxy for UHI.
They either investigated Land Use Land Cover (LULC) dynamics using remotely sensed data to establish the link between LULCC, LST, as well as variations in the intensities on a spatial and temporal scale. This shows that 75% of the SUHI studies did not intrinsically investigate the UHI effect but examined whether Spatio‐temporal factors are related to LST (figure 2a). For the CUHI group, studies were analyzed based on data source and measurement approach such as the number of transect points and instrument set up with respect to the height as well as justification for urban and rural site selection. The analytical methods employed in estimating the Canopy Urban Heat Island Intensity (CUHII) were also evaluated, 64.3% (n=9) of the CUHI study employed fixed method of temperature, 20% (n=3) of the study utilized the mobile traverse method, whereas 26.7% (n=4) used data from weather stations. Figure 2b shows the variations of the mean maximum CUHII as reported in each study. Somehow, only 63.3% of the CUHI studies estimated the CUHII. Significant variations in the CUHII were observed in the studies. This variation may be associated with the size and scale, measurement period and analytical method of the UHI study accordingly, as there is no objective definition of urban areas, which gives rise to inconsistencies in the choice of location for placing the instrument.
Figure 2. (a) Classification of SUHI studies based on the intrinsic definition of Surface Urban Heat Island Intensity (SUHII) (b) Variations of the maximum CUHII
4. Conclusions
The reviewed studies have generally evident the abrupt increase in urbanization and corresponding urban warming, particularly in the last two decades; A large proportion of UHI studies reviewed focused on LST changes to evident SUHI powered by the open‐access Landsat data. The studies have, however, incorrectly presumed a vertical homogeneity for impervious and built up areas. However, a smaller proportion of the studies classified the urban area in terms of density variations (High density, medium density and low density). This is a step toward evaluating an intra‐UHI. To improve the effectiveness of measuring the magnitude of the UHI effect in cities worldwide, a uniform and standardized method of land use classification for easy inter‐city comparison, the Local Climate Zone(LCZ), is proposed over this region. This will further support the Urban Canopy Parametrisation (UCP) needs of mesoscale and microscale modeling.
Separately from inconsistencies and an awkward classification of urban and rural sites, 3 other gaps were noticed from this systematic review; i. inconsistencies in the relevant period of interest ii Inadequate cross‐validation of spatial and temporal variations in UHI and iii. the lagging effect of meteorological factors was not well accounted for. Therefore, we propose the adoption of LCZ scheme with its robust UCP for a sparse data region like West Africa in UHI Modelling.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Di Ruocco A., Gasparini P., Weets G. (2015) Urbanisation and Climate Change in Africa: Setting the Scene. In: Pauleit S. et al. (eds) Urban Vulnerability and Climate Change in Africa. Future City, vol 4. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐319‐03982‐4_1
2. I. Buo, V. Sagris, I. Burdun, and E. Uuemaa, “Estimating the expansion of urban areas and urban heat islands (UHI) in Ghana: a case study,” Nat. Hazards, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 1299–1321, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11069‐020‐04355‐4.
3. G. Ceccherini, S. Russo, I. Ameztoy, A. Francesco Marchese, and C. Carmona‐Moreno, “Heat waves in Africa 1981‐2015, observations and reanalysis,” Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 115–125, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.5194/nhess‐17‐115‐
2017.
4. P. J. Marcotullio, C. Keßler, and B. M. Fekete, “The future urban heatwave challenge in Africa: Exploratory analysis,” Glob.
Environ. Chang., vol. 66, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102190.
5. V. Murray and K. L. Ebi, “IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX),” J. Epidemiol. Community Health, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 759–760, 2012, doi: 10.1136/jech‐2012‐
201045.
6. S. Chapman, J. E. M. Watson, A. Salazar, M. Thatcher, and C. A. McAlpine, “The impact of urbanization and climate change on urban temperatures: a systematic review,” Landscape Ecology, vol. 32, no. 10. Springer Netherlands, pp. 1921–1935, Oct.
08, 2017, doi: 10.1007/s10980‐017‐0561‐4.
7. UN Department of Economics and Social Affairs, “World Population Prospects ‐ Population Division ‐ United Nations,”
The International Journal of Logistics Management, 2015. https://population.un.org/wpp/ (accessed Aug. 26, 2021)
