بررسی تأثیر عوامل کیفیت محیطی بر رضایتمندی ساکنان در مجتمع‎های مسکونی در مشهد

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی - کاربردی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار و عضو هیئت‌علمی گروه معماری دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری

2 کارشناس ارشد معماری، دانشگاه علوم تحقیقات خراسان رضوی

3 مربی و عضو هیئت‌علمی گروه معماری دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری

چکیده

تحولات صد سال اخیر کشور درزمینۀ نظام اقتصادی، سیاسی و کمبود زمین، ایدۀ انبوه‎سازی مسکن و مجتمع‎های مسکونی را در شهرها رقم زده است. نکته‌ای که در بررسی روند ایجاد مجتمع‎های مسکونی در ایران مشاهده می‌شود، این است که همواره از توجه به اصول و معیارهای شهرسازی در برنامه‎ریزی و طراحی غالب مجتمع‎های مسکونی کاسته شده و این‌گونه مساکن از ایجاد محیط مطلوب مسکونی فاصله گرفته‎اند. درنتیجه، این موضوع باعث نارضایتی ساکنان شده است. اولین گام در جهت دستیابی به محیط مطلوب و رضایت ساکنان، شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر رضایتمندی است؛ به‌طوری که شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر رضایتمندی ساکنان مجتمع‎های مسکونی می‌تواند در جهت تحلیل وضع موجود سکونت، برنامه‎ریزی برای ارتقای کیفیت زندگی در آن مجتمع‎ها و جلوگیری از تکرار نواقص مفید باشد. بدین خاطر، مقاله حاضر به ارزیابی میزان رضایتمندی ساکنان مجتمع‎های مسکونی در شهر مشهد به‌عنوان دومین کلان‌شهر کشور و شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر آن پرداخته است. روش تحقیق در این پژوهش توصیفی- تحلیلی و روش جمع‎آوری داده‎ها به دو صورت اسنادی و پیمایشی (پرسش‌نامه) است. جامعۀ آماری پژوهش، ساکنان مجتمع‌های مسکونی در شهر مشهد هستند. این پژوهش از طریق انتخاب جامعۀ نمونه، با استفاده از روش کوکران و تکمیل پرسش‌نامه انجام شده است. روایی پرسش‌نامه‌ها هم با استفاده از فرمول آلفای کرونباخ، بیش از 0.7 به دست آمد که نمایانگر روایی مطلوب است. برای تحلیل داده‎ها نیز از نرم‌افزار لیزرل و روش الگوسازی معادلات ساختاری استفاده شده است. براساس نتایج مجموعه عوامل کیفیت محیطی یعنی عوامل عملکردی، تجربی- زیباشناختی و زیست‌محیطی بر میزان رضایتمندی سکونتی تأثیرگذار هستند. عامل عملکردی با زیرعامل‌های شخصی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی از عامل رضایتمندی دارای رابطۀ معنادار است؛ اما با زیرعامل محیطی رابطۀ معناداری ندارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of Environmental Quality towards Satisfaction of Users in Mashhad Housing Complexes

نویسندگان [English]

  • Shahab Abbaszadeh 1
  • Farzaneh Gohari 2
  • Abasalt Askari Rabori 3
1 Assistante Professor, Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Hakim Sabzevari University, Iran
2 M.A. in Architecture and Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Khorasan Razavi, Iran
3 Instructor in Architecture and Urban Planning, Hakim Sabzevari University, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
A hundred years of relentless development in economic and political system and lack of available land puts the idea of mass housing and residential complexes forward in urban areas. What is noticeable through this process in Iran is that the principles and guidelines of urban development in planning and design were declined significantly in most of the residential complexes. This decline caused these places to take the creation of optimal environment for granted and consequently brought about the dissatisfaction of the residents. The first step to have a favorable environment and the satisfaction of residents is to pinpoint the major satisfaction factors. This could be useful for analyzing the current residence status, planning for improving life quality in the complexes, and preventing the recurrence of defects. Given that, the present article evaluates the level of satisfaction of those who live in residential complexes of Mashhad City, as the second metropolis of Iran. The research method of this descriptive-analytical study and data collection procedures are documental and survey (questionnaire), respectively. LISREL Software and structural equation modeling method were used for data analysis. According to the results, all environmental quality factors including functional, experimental-aesthetic, and environmental affect the level of residential satisfaction. There is a significant relationship between functional factors and personal, social, and cultural sub-factors, but there is no relationship between the so-called factors and the environmental sub-factors.
According to Carney, the residents introduced social factors as the most significant satisfaction criteria, while planners, designers, and architects focus more on physical and structural features. Some older studies, like studies of Karp, were also examined the problem. He stated that neighborhood features contribute more on the level of satisfaction than physical characteristics in elderly residents. In cases that people were satisfied with their neighbors, residential satisfaction was at a favorable level either, even if other residential factors were not satisfactory. Potter and Cantarero declared that physical factors are more privileged for modern residents, but those with longer residence record prefer the social factors and interaction with neighbors as the most. Billups counted neighborly relations, partnership, and mutual values as effective social factors in residential satisfaction.
Based on the results of Carney’s research, residents consider social factors as the most important criteria of satisfaction, while planners, designers and architects show more attention to the physical characteristics. It should be mentioned that this issue was also raised in the older studies such as Karp’s (1966) research. Based on his research, neighbourhood characteristics are more involved in determining satisfaction of elderly residents than physical characteristics. In cases where people are satisfied with their neighbours, satisfaction with the residential environment is very high, even when other factors are not satisfactory enough. According to Potter and Kantarro (2006) for new residents, physical factors are considered important in satisfaction, while for those with a longer history of settlement, social factors and interaction with neighbours are considered more important. Bylaps also considers neighbourhood relations, cooperation and shared values of people as social determinants of resident satisfaction.
Methodology
This paper is descriptive-analytical in terms of research method and functional in terms of objective. Data were gathered through documentation (library resources) and survey (questionnaire) method. The content validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by related professors and experts. The Cronbach's alpha method was used for the reliability of the questionnaires. The calculated pretest alpha for all items is higher than 0.7, which is indicative of high reliability of research instruments.
Current research is analytical-descriptive in terms of methodology, and applied in terms of purpose. Data are collected using document-based (based on library resources) and survey (questionnaire) methods. The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by professionals and experts, and Cronbach's alpha was used to test reliability. The alpha value obtained from the pre-test check for all items was higher than 0.7, indicating very high reliability of research tool.
Conclusions
Environmental factors are more influential on the satisfaction of residents than other factors (personal, social, and cultural). In addition, each of these factors has significant relations with each other. Functional factors are interrelated with aesthetic-empirical factors. The aesthetic-empirical factors are interrelated with environmental factors, and functional factors are interrelated with environmental factors and the other factors (personal, social, and cultural). In addition, each of the aesthetic-empirical and environmental factors has significant relation with architectural elements, environmental factors and other factors (personal, social, and cultural). This can be justified as the respondents are almost homogenous in terms of personal, social and cultural conditions, since the sale rules and regulations of the units of complexes lead to attraction of people who have commonalities in terms of education, income and social and cultural factors. This is also observed in the descriptive findings. Therefore, people have a higher satisfaction with personal, social and cultural factors and there are very little problems from this perspective.
Environmental factors affect more significantly the level of residential satisfaction than other personal, social, and cultural factors. Moreover, the factors have a significant relationship with each other in this study. For example, functional factors have a significant relationship with experimental-aesthetic factors, experimental-aesthetic with environmental and functional factors with environmental and other personal, social, and cultural factors. Furthermore, each experimental-aesthetic and environmental factor has a significant relationship with architectural, environmental, and other personal, social, and cultural factors. This could be due to the fact that, all respondents enjoy from a similar personal, social, and cultural factors, in that the terms of sale of residential units under study will result in attraction of households with more commonalities in terms of education, income, and sociocultural factors. The results can be seen in descriptive findings. Therefore, people are more satisfied with personal, social, and cultural factors and fewer problems are existed regarding the issue.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • environmental quality factors
  • Mashhad
  • residential complexes
  • Satisfaction
  • Users
  1. ابراهیم‌زاده، عیسی؛ سرگزی، زینب (1389)، «آپارتمان‌نشینی در شهرهای اسلامی و مشکلات فرهنگی ناشی از آن (مطالعه موردی: شهر زاهدان)»، مجموعه مقالات چهارمین کنگرۀ بین‌المللی جغرافی‌دانان جهان اسلام، صص۱۶-۱.
  2. اسماعیلی، الهه؛ نادری، فرح (1387)، «بررسی رابطۀ احساس ذهنی رضایتمندی از زندگی و افسردگی با اندیشه‌پردازی خودکشی در دانشجویان دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد اهواز»، همایش ملی روان‌شناسی و کاربرد آن در جامعه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت.
  3. امینی، صبا؛ حسینی، سیدباقر و نوروزیان ملکی، سعید (1391)، «بررسی تطبیقی میزان رضایتمندی ساکنان بین دو نمونه از مجتمع‌های مسکونی میان‌مرتبه و بلندمرتبه (نمونه‌های موردی: مجتمع‌های مسکونی شهید محلاتی و سبحان)»، آرمان‌شهر، صص ۱۳-۱.
  4. حسینی، معصومه (1392)، «بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر پراکنده‌رویی شهر مشهد»، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار.
  5. خلیل‌مرد، حسین؛ محمدزاده، یوسف (1389)، «ارزیابی ملاحظات شهرسازی در احداث مجتمع‌های مسکونی تبریز»، نشریۀ آبادی، شماره 67.
  6. درودی، محمدرضا؛ جهانشاهلو، لعلا؛ شهریاری، سیدکمال‌الدین (1393)، «سنجش میزان رضایتمندی ساکنین مسکن مهر با رویکرد مدیریت شهری (مطالعۀ موردی: مجتمع بوستان شهر جدید هشتگرد)»، اقتصاد و مدیریت شهری، 3(9)، 125-141.
  7. ذبیحی، حسین؛ حبیب، فرح؛ رهبری‌منش، کمال (1390)، «بررسی رابطۀ بین میزان رضایت از مجتمع‌های مسکونی و تأثیر مجتمع‌های مسکونی بر روابط انسان (مطالعۀ موردی: چند مجتمع مسکونی در تهران)»،هویت شهر، 5(8)، صص ۱۰۳-۱۱۸.
  8. رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ امین صاحی، امین؛ تقوایی، علی‌اکبر (1389)، «سنجش کیفیت محیط سکونت در شهرک اکباتان تهران»، برنامه‌ریزی و آمایش فضا، دورۀ چهاردهم، شمارۀ4، صص ۸۵-۶۳.
  9. سیاح، عبدالحمید (۱۳۷۸)، فرهنگ جامع فارسی به فارسی، انتشارات اسلام. چاپ سوم.
  10. صابری ایرج، زکیه (1386)، «بررسی اثرات ژئومورفیک گسترش شهر مشهد در فاصلۀ زمانی 13۸۵-13۴۵»، پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه فردوسی، مشهد.
  11. طبی مسرور، ابوالقاسم؛ رضایی مؤید، صادق (1394)، «ارزیابی میزان رضایت شهروندی از کیفیت‌های سکونتی در مجتمع‎های مسکونی؛ موردپژوهی: مجتمع‎های مسکونی شهر همدان»، مدیریت شهری، (4)، صص ۸۰-۶۱.
  12. عادلی، زینب؛ سردره، علی‌اکبر (۱۳۹۰)، «مکان‌یابی ساختمان‌های بلند مسکونی در قزوین با استفاده از فرایند سلسله‌مراتبی AHP و GIS»، سومین کنفرانس برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری.
  13. عباس‌زاده، شهاب؛ گوهری، فرزانه (1392)، «واکاوی تحلیلی فاکتورهای تأثیرگذار (برونداد نظری-تحلیلی) در دستیابی به الگوی رضایتمندی در مجتمع‌های مسکونی پایدار»، اولین کنفرانس ملی معماری و فضاهای شهری پایدار، مشهد مقدس.
  14. عزیزی، محمدمهدی؛ ملک محمدنژاد، صارم (۱۳۸۶)، «بررسی تطبیقی دو الگوی مجتمع‎های مسکونی (متعارف و بلندمرتبه) مطالعۀ موردی: مجتمع‎های مسکونی نور (سئول) و اسکان تهران»، نشریۀ هنرهای زیبا، شمارۀ 32، صص 27-38.
  15. گلابچی، محمود (1388)، «معیارهایی برای طراحی و ساخت بناهای بلند»، نشریۀ هنرهای زیبا، شمارۀ 9، صص ۶۲-۵۲.
  16. محروم‌زاده، مهرداد (1388)، «انگیزش، رضایتمندی و تحلیل‌رفتگی داوطلبان در ورزش»، مدیریت ورزشی، شمارۀ1، صص 51-65.
  17. محمودی‌نژاد، هادی؛ صادقی، علیرضا (1388)، طراحی شهری؛ از روان‌شناسی محیطی تا رفاه اجتماعی، تهران: هله، طحان.
  18. هومن، حیدرعلی (1390)، مدل‌یابی معادلات ساختاری، با کاربرد نرم‌افزار لیزرل، تهران: سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌ها (سمت).
 

 

  1. Abdul Mohit M., Ibrahim M, Razidah Rashid Y,2000 ,"Assessment of residential statisfacation in newly designed public low-cost housing in kualalumpur Malaysia". J habitat International. Pp18-27.
  2. Adesoji David Jiboye(2010), EVALUATING THE PATTERN OF RESIDENTIAL QUALITY IN NIGERIA: THE CASE OF OSOGBO TOWNSHIP, Architecture and Civil Engineering Vol. 8, No 3, 2010, pp. 307 – 316, DOI: 10.2298/FUACE1003307J.
  3. Amérigo, María; Aragonés, Juan Ignacio (1997), A Theoretical and Methodological Approach to the Study of Residential Satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Psychology,17, 47-57
  4. Basolo, V. & Strong, D. (2002) Understanding the neighborhood: From residents’ perceptions and needs to action, Housing Policy Debate, 13(1), pp. 83–105. doi:10.1080/10511482.2002.9521436
  5. Billups, F.D. (2008), “Measuring college student satisfaction: a multi-year study of the factors leading to persistence”, Proceedings of the Northeastern Educational Research Association(NERA) Annual Conference, Rocky Hill, CT, 22-24 October, pp. 1-17.
  6. Bonaiuto, Marino; Aiello, Antonio; Perugini, Marco;Bonnes, Mirilia; Ercolani, Anna Paola (1999), Multidimensional Perception of Residential Environment Quality and Neighbourhood Attachment in the Urban Environment.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 331-352.
  7. Bonaiuto, Marino; Fornara, Ferdinando; Bonnes, Mirilia(2006), Perceived Residential Environment Quality In middle- And low-Extension Italian Cities. Revue Européennede Psychologie Appliquée / European Review of AppliedPsychology, 56, 23-34.
  8. Bott H (2012) The dimensions of sustainability. In GreenAge:Approaches and Perspectives Towards Sustainability (Ergonul S, Kocabas A, Erbas E, Gundes S, Karaosman KS and Eren IO (eds)). Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, I˙stanbul, Turkey, pp. 23–47.
  9. Canter, David V. (1977), The Psychology of Place, London,Architectural Press
  10. Carp, E. M., 1966, A Future for the Aged: the Residents of Victoria Plaza, Austin : univ. of Texas Press, 287 pp.
  11. Carp, F.M., & Carp, A. (1982). Perceived environmental quality of neighborhoods: Development of assessment scales and their relation to age and gender. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2, 245-312.
  12. Chapman DW and Lombard JR (2006) Determinants of neighborhood satisfaction in fee-based gated and non-gated communities. Urban Affairs Review 41(6): 769–799.
  13. Dekker, K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S. & van Kempen, R. (2011) Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: A multi-level research approach, Housing Studies, 26(04), pp. 479–499. doi:10.1080/02673037.2011.559751
  14. Fallahi, B. Ahmad Hariza Hashim Husniyah Binti Abdul Rahim, Mohamad Fazli Sabri (2015), Relationship between Background Characteristics and Housing Satisfaction of Iranian Homeowners in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Educational, Health and Community Psychology, 4(2), http://www.journal.uad.ac.id/index.php/Psychology/article/view/2118
  15. Gibson, K. J. (2007). The relocation of the Columbia Villa community: views from residents. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 27, 5e19.
  16. Hipp, J. (2010) What is the “neighbourhood” in neighbourhood satisfaction? Comparing the effects of structural characteristics measured at the micro-neighbourhood and tract levels, Urban Studies, 47(12),pp. 2517–2536. doi:10.1177/0042098009359950
  17. Hui, E.C. and Zheng, X. (2010), “Measuring customer satisfaction of FM service in housing sector: a structural equation model approach”, Facilities, Vol. 28 Nos 5/6, pp. 306-20.
  18. Hur M and Morrow-Jones H (2008) Factors that influence residents’ satisfaction with neighborhoods. Environment and Behavior 40(5): 619–635.
  19. Johanson, E.A.J., (1998), The Orgnaization of Spase in Development Press, Countries,Cambridge, Harvard University.
  20. Kearney AR (2006) Residential development patterns and neighborhood satisfaction: impacts of density and nearby nature. Environment and Behavior 38(1):112–139.
  21. Li, S. & Song, Y. (2009) Redevelopment, displacement, housing conditions, and residential satisfaction: A study of Shanghai, Environment and Planning A, 41(5), pp. 1090–1108. doi:10.1068/a4168.
  22. Li, Z. & Wu, F. (2013) Residential satisfaction in china’s informal settlements: A case study of Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, Urban Geography, 34(7), pp. 923–949. doi:10.1080/02723638.2013.778694.
  23. Max Lu, Max(1999),. Determinants of Residential Satisfaction: Ordered Logit vs. Regression Models, Spring, (30), pp264-287, Article first published online: 17 DEC 2002.
  24. Mc Cray J.W, Day S.S, 1997,” Housing Values, Aspirations and Satisfactions as Indicators of Housing Need”, Home Economics. Vol 5, No 4, Pp 244-254.
  25. Miller, F. D., Tsemberis, S., Malia, G. P. & Grega, D. (1980) Neighborhood satisfaction among urban dwellers,Journal of Social Issues, 36(3), pp. 101–117. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1980.tb02038.x.
  26. Mohit, M. A., Ibrahim, M. & Rashid, Y. R. (2010) Assessment of residential satisfaction in newly designed public low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Habitat International, 34(1), pp. 18–27. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.04.002
  27. M. Sam ; University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia ; M. F. M. Zain ; O. Saadatian(2012). Residential satisfaction; Meaning and interpretation Business Engineering and Industrial Applications Colloquium (BEIAC), 2012 IEEE  Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia , pp279 - 283 DOI:10.1109/BEIAC.2012.6226067 .
  28. Muhammad Hilmy Muslim, Hafazah Abdul Karim, Ishak Che Abdullah. 2012. Satisfaction of Students’Living Environment between On-Campus and Off-Campus Settings: A Conceptual Overview. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 68, 601-614. [CrossRef]
  29. Najib, Nurul 'Ulyani Mohd; Yusof, Nor' Aini; Abidin, Nazirah Zainul(2011), Student residential satisfaction in research universities, Journal of Facilities Management, Volume 9, Number 3, 2011, pp. 200-212(13).
  30. Ozaki, R. (2003), “Customer-focused approaches to innovation in housebuilding”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 557-64.
  31. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, pp. 41-50.
  32. Parkes, A., Kearns, A. & Atkinson, R. (2002) What makes people dissatisfied with their neighbourhoods? UrbanStudies, 39(13), pp. 2413–2438. doi:10.1080/0042098022000027031.
  33. Permentier, M., Bolt, G. & van Ham, M. (2011) Determinants of neighbourhood satisfaction and perception of neighbourhood reputation, Urban Studies, 48(5), pp. 977–996. doi:10.1177/0042098010367860.
  34. Potter J and Cantarero R (2006) How does ıncreasing population and diversity affect resident satisfaction? Environment and Behavior 38(5):605–625.
  35. P. Xue, C.M. Mak, Z.T. Ai(2016), A structured approach to overall environmental satisfaction in high-rise residential buildings, Energy and Buildings, Volume 116, Pages 181-189.
  36. Raeesa Moolla,Nico Kotze,Liz Block(2011), Housing satisfaction and quality of life in RDP houses in Braamfischerville, Soweto: A South African case study, Urbani izzi,22(1), Doi:10.5379/urbani-izziv-en-2011-11-01-005.
  37. Riley, M., Kokkarinen, N. and Pitt, M. (2010), “Assessing post occupancy evaluation in higher education facilities”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 202-213.
  38. Song, Y. and Yan, Z. (2006), “Customer satisfaction theory applied in the housing industry:an empirical study of low-priced housing in Beijing”, Tsinghua Science and Technology,Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 667-74.
  39. Tan Teck-Hong(2012), Housing satisfaction in medium- and high-cost housing: The case of Greater Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Habitat International, Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 108–116, doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.06.003.
  40. Van Poll R (1997) The Perceived Quality of the Urban Residential Environment. A Multi-attribute Evaluation. PhD thesis, Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, The Netherlands,
  41. Wang, Donggen; Wang, Fenglong(2016), Contributions of the Usage and Affective Experience of the Residential Environment to Residential Satisfaction, Housing Studies, 31(1-2), pp. 42-60(19),: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group,Published in:
  42. Yang, Y. (2008) A tale of two cities: Physical form and neighborhood satisfaction in metropolitan Portland and Charlotte, Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(3), pp. 307–323. doi:10.1080/01944360802215546.
  43. Yasemin Afacan(2015),Resident satisfaction for sustainable urban regeneration, Municipal Engineer, pp1-15, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/muen.14.00046
  44. Zamzuri, N.H., Mohamed, N. and Hussein, R. (2008), “Antecedents of customer satisfaction in repurchase intention in the electronic commerce environment”, International Symposium on Information Technology (ITSim 2008), Kuala Lumpur, 22-26 August, IEEE Xplore,pp . 1-5.