SYNTHESIS AND NEW DEFINITION OF THE AREAS INCLUDED IN THE URBAN-RURAL GRADIENT

André M., Mahy G., Lejeune P., Bogaert J.

S3: Modelling of urban ecosystems – new approaches

2

1/3 Introduction: variable définitions

Forstall et al, 2008

3

2/3 Aims of the study

1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural gradient

4

2/3 Aims of the study

1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural gradient

2. Evaluate the relative importance of

characteristics and types of characteristics for

every area and for the whole gradient

5

2/3 Aims of the study

1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural gradient

2. Evaluate the relative importance of

characteristics and types of characteristics for

every area and for the whole gradient

3. Evaluate the characteristics

6

2/3 Aims of the study

1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural gradient

2. Evaluate the relative importance of

characteristics and types of characteristics for

every area and for the whole gradient

3. Evaluate the characteristics

4. Propose new definitions to the most cited areas

using the retained characteristics

7

2/3 Aims of the study

1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural gradient

2. Evaluate the relative importance of characteristics and

types of characteristics for every area and for the

whole gradient

3. Evaluate the characteristics

4. Propose new definitions to the most cited areas using

the retained characteristics

5. Translate definitions to landscape metrics (following

studies based on satellite imagery)

8

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban ruralsuburban

9

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban

?

ruralsuburban

10

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban

?

ruralsuburbanperiurban

11

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban

?

ruralsuburbanperiurban

sprawl

12

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban

?

ruralsuburbanperiurban

sprawl

exurban

13

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban

?

ruralsuburbanperiurban

sprawl

exurban rurban

14

3/3 Method and results: 1. Identify the areas in the urban-rural

gradient

urban

?

ruralsuburbanperiurban

sprawl

exurban rurban

wildlands

15

3/3 Method and results: 2. Evaluate the relative importance of

characteristics and types of characteristics for every area and for the whole gradient

Literature review

Citation index If (%) for each area and each characteristic

With i = characterictic for which the index is calculatedz = area for which the index is calculatedfiz = citation frequency of the characteristic i in the area znc = total number of characteristics used to describe the area

Relative frequency index Ifr (%) for the whole urbanization

gradient

selection of the 10 most cited for each area

16

Urban BanlieuePeri-sub-

urbanExurban Sprawl Rural

Relative position in a gradient starting from the city center

Morphologic 3 11 8 33 3 26 84 100

Landscape composition Morphologic 18 11 12 11 6 15 73 87

Population density Demographic 13 11 4 7 9 15 59 70

Settlements density Morphologic 7 4 7 10 11 39 46

Space organization: dispersion of the settlements

Morphologic 6 17 4 11 38 45

Number of inhabitants Demographic 9 15 24 29

Distance to the city center Morphologic 4 7 3 14 17

Commuting Functional/mobility 4 7 11 13

Space organization: mix of land use; disposition, uniformity and type of settlements in the residential space

Morphologic 9 9 11

Landscape metrics Morphologic 8 8 10

Modes of transport Functional/mobility 7 7 8

Speed of change Dynamic 3 3 6 7

Population growth Demographic 3 3 6 7

Single-family homes Morphologic 4 4 5

Waste Environnemental 4 4 5

Energy Energetical 4 4 5

Type of development Dynamic 4 4 5

Land market Economic 3 3 4

Shape of houses Morphologic 3 3 4

Accessibility Functional/mobility 3 3 4

Power structure Institutionnal 2 2 2

Relation to the administrative borders Administrative and legal 2 2 2

Composition and richness in species Biodiversity 2 2 2

Type of characteristic

Citation index If, per area (%) Sum of frequency indexes for the whole gradient (%)

Relative frequency index (%)

Characteristics

zIf Ifr

17

3/3 Method and results: 3. Evaluate the characteristics

According to: The field of study of the author The technic of study used The context of the study area

18

3/3 Method and results: 3. Evaluate the characteristics

According to: The field of study of the author The technic of study used The context of the study area

In our study, the perfect characteristic is (at least 3):

(1) Quantitative, (2) integrative, (3) consensual,

(4) discriminative, (5) easy to obtain

19

Urban BanlieuePeri-sub-

urbanExurban Sprawl Rural

Relative position in a gradient starting from the city center

Morphologic 3 11 8 33 3 26 84 100

Landscape composition Morphologic 18 11 12 11 6 15 73 87

Population density Demographic 13 11 4 7 9 15 59 70

Settlements density Morphologic 7 4 7 10 11 39 46

Space organization: dispersion of the settlements

Morphologic 6 17 4 11 38 45

Number of inhabitants Demographic 9 15 24 29

Distance to the city center Morphologic 4 7 3 14 17

Commuting Functional/mobility 4 7 11 13

Space organization: mix of land use; disposition, uniformity and type of settlements in the residential space

Morphologic 9 9 11

Landscape metrics Morphologic 8 8 10

Modes of transport Functional/mobility 7 7 8

Speed of change Dynamic 3 3 6 7

Population growth Demographic 3 3 6 7

Single-family homes Morphologic 4 4 5

Waste Environnemental 4 4 5

Energy Energetical 4 4 5

Type of development Dynamic 4 4 5

Land market Economic 3 3 4

Shape of houses Morphologic 3 3 4

Accessibility Functional/mobility 3 3 4

Power structure Institutionnal 2 2 2

Relation to the administrative borders Administrative and legal 2 2 2

Composition and richness in species Biodiversity 2 2 2

Type of characteristic

Citation index If, per area (%) Sum of frequency indexes for the whole gradient (%)

Relative frequency index (%)

Characteristics

zIf Ifr

Quantitative Integrative Consensual DiscriminativeEase of obtainig

x x x

x x x x

x x

x

x x x

x

x

x x

x x x

x

x x x

x

x

x

x x

x x

x

x

x x

x

x

x

x

20

Characteristic Quantitative Integrative Consensual DiscriminativeEase of obtainig

Relative position in a gradient starting from the city center

x x x

Landscape composition x x x x

Population density x x

Settlements density x

Space organization: dispersion of the settlements

x x x

Number of inhabitants x

Distance to the city center x

Commuting x x

Space organization: mix of land use; disposition, uniformity and type of settlements in the residential space

x x x

Landscape metrics x

Modes of transport x x x

Speed of change x

Population growth x

Single-family homes x

Waste x x

Energy x x

Type of development x

Land market x

Shape of houses x x

Accessibility x

Power structure x

Relation to the administrative borders x

Composition and richness in species x

21

3/3 Method and results: 4. Propose new definitions to the most cited

areas using the retained characteristics

22

Lubumbashi, RDC

23

Lubumbashi, RDC

24

Lubumbashi, RDC

25

Lubumbashi, RDC

26

Lubumbashi, RDC

27

Lubumbashi, RDC

28

3/3 Method and results: 5. Translate definitions to landscape metrics

(following studies based on satellite imagery)

Dominant class indexDominant indexProportion of built area index Patch density (ρ)Edge to nearest neighbor edge distance (z)Agregation index (R)Proximity index (PX)

Dominant class indexDominant indexProportion of built area index

29

30

THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Images Spot © CNES (2012), distribution Spot Image S.A.