مروری بر کاربرد و روش‌های اولویت‌بندی در حفاظت روستاهای باارزش

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه معماری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 گروه ساختمان، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

3 گروه مطالعات معماری و مرمت، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

اولویت‌بندی یکی از اقداماتی است که امروزه در برنامه‌ریزی پیش از اقدامات اجرایی استفاده می‌شود و با هدف تعیین تقدم و تأخر در حفاظت میراث معماری، به کار می‌رود. اولویت‌بندی، در شرایطی همچون محدودیت زمان و بودجه و تعدد نمونه، ضرورت می‌یابد. این پژوهش در نظر دارد به کاربرد اولویت‌بندی در حفاظت روستاهای باارزش و نیز تحلیل و بررسی روش‌های آن بپردازد. بر اساس هدف پژوهش، بررسی اولویت‌بندی با 1. بررسی تجارب پژوهشی؛ 2. شناسایی گام‌ها و روش‌های علمی آن؛ 3. بررسی مزایا و معایب هریک از روش‌ها؛ 4. شناسایی و معرفی مناسب‌ترین روش 5. ارزیابی روش در نمونه موردی روستاها و اولویت‌بندی روستاهای موردنظر، انجام‌شده است. روش تحقیق در بخش نخست با تکیه‌بر مطالعات کتابخانه‌ای، تحلیلی‌ـ مقایسه‌ای است که در بررسی تجربه‌های پژوهشی، به دنبال شناخت روش‌ها، گام‌های ضروری در اولویت‌بندی و شناسایی مناسب‌ترین روش برای اولویت‌بندی روستاهای باارزش بوده است. در بخش دوم از روش آماری و توصیفی- استنباطی استفاده‌شده است و برای اعتبارسنجی روش موردنظر و اولویت‌بندی روستاهای منتخب طرح بهسازی بافت‌های باارزش روستایی بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی، 55 نمونه روستای منتخب در این طرح مورد ارزیابی و اولویت‌بندی قرار گرفته است. باتوجه‌به نتایج این تحقیق، روش‌های MDBD و TOPSIS و DEA، برای حل مسئله اولویت‌بندی روستاهای باارزش، مناسب‌اند. با استفاده از این روش‌ها می‌توان مسائل دارای اولویت‌بندی پیچیده، چندمعیاره، چندگزینه‌ای، چند مقیاسی، چندهدفه و چندبعدی را حل کرد. با توجه به سهولت در روش MDBD نسبت به دو روش پیشنهادی دیگر، این روش مناسب‌ترین روش معرفی‌شده و با کمک این روش اولویت‌بندی روستاهای نمونه موردی انجام‌شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Review of Prioritization Methods in Preserving Valuable Villages

نویسندگان [English]

  • Khatereh Talebi 1
  • Mohsen Sartipi pour 2
  • Mitra Azad 3
  • Akbar Haj Ebrahim, Zargar 3
1 Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Construction, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Architectural Studies and Restoration, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran Iran
چکیده [English]

A B S T R A C T
Prioritization is a crucial strategy in contemporary planning to establish the order of importance for preserving architectural heritage, especially under constraints like time and budget. This research focuses on applying prioritization in the protection of valuable villages and analyzes various methodologies. The study encompasses several objectives: reviewing research experiences, identifying essential steps and scientific methods, evaluating the pros and cons of each method, identifying the most suitable approach, and assessing the method through case studies of villages. In the first section, the methodology is grounded in library studies and analytical-comparative techniques, which aim to identify necessary steps for prioritization and determine the most effective methods for valuable villages. The second section employs statistical and descriptive-inferential methods. To validate the proposed approach, the study evaluates 55 selected villages as part of a renovation project initiated by the Housing Foundation of the Islamic Revolution. Findings indicate that the MDBD, TOPSIS, and DEA methods are appropriate for addressing the prioritization of valuable villages. These methodologies effectively tackle complex prioritization issues across various criteria and dimensions. Among these, the MDBD method stands out for its simplicity and is identified as the most suitable approach for prioritizing the case study villages.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
The concept of prioritization is a critical step in planning and decision-making, carried out with various goals and approaches across different disciplines. In heritage conservation, prioritization aims to identify priority options for budget allocation to achieve economic efficiency. The prioritization of the conservation of buildings and historical fabrics is undertaken with diverse approaches and criteria worldwide. Global experiences show that prioritization in the form of planning conservation actions has focused more on achieving order and structure to identify the most valuable items. With the help of several criteria, it aims to create a systematic structure for arranging priorities. Although this approach is used in many conservation practices, giving special attention to prioritization and defining specific approaches and objectives is crucial and essential in planning.
Village habitation in Iran has a long history. Through interviews with experts from the Housing Foundation of Islamic Revolution and the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism, and Handicrafts, and by reviewing documents, records, and working group studies on valuable villages, a total of about 900 valuable villages have been identified. The plan for improving valuable rural fabrics was first approved in the third development plan in 2000, and by the sixth development plan, 120 villages were selected for the improvement project. Among these, the plan has only been completed in 56 villages so far; in each development plan period, some villages are added to those from previous periods. Without proper planning and with economic challenges in funding, villages remain in a waiting queue.  Thus, this research aims to examine prioritization in conserving valuable villages and identify scientific steps and methods for prioritization. By applying scientific decision-making methods, prioritization in conserving valuable villages can be conducted more purposefully and practically. Additionally, this research seeks to examine the strengths and weaknesses of each method and identify the appropriate method for prioritization.
 
Methodology
This research was conducted using library studies and analytical-comparative methods. In reviewing previous studies, the essential steps for prioritizing architectural heritage conservation were identified, and the advantages and disadvantages of these methods were examined. Finally, through evaluation and analysis, the most suitable method for prioritizing historical villages in Iran is proposed. In the second part, statistical and descriptive methods have been used. To validate the method, 55 samples of selected villages were evaluated and prioritized in the improvement plan for valuable rural fabric (this plan is one of the essential rural protection plans in Iran).
 
Results and discussion
A general review of experiences and theoretical studies indicates that prioritization has been conducted based on different approaches, components, and criteria. Prioritization is a practical method that, with the use of mathematical knowledge, leads to more precise planning. To achieve the goal of prioritization, three essential steps must be taken as determining the approach, the criteria and indicators, and the method. According to research, prioritization can be carried out using various approaches, such as the at-risk heritage approach. There is a direct relationship between the approach and the research objective, and the research objective determines the approach. Criteria and indicators are also determined based on and in accordance with the approach. In prioritization, mixed methods can be used according to the research needs. Additionally, the research might employ mixed approaches, requiring the selected criteria and methods to align with the research approach. In determining the prioritization method, attention to the features of each method is essential since some methods are suitable for multi-objective and multi-criteria research, while others are single-objective. The methods also have different ranking capabilities, and recognizing the most appropriate method based on the research objective and approach is crucial. Applying the prioritization method for conserving valuable villages allows for determining the selection order for valuable villages for implementation and other conservation actions.
Types of multi-criteria prioritization methods can be divided into two main categories:

a) Primary Methods: Ahp; Anp; Wsm; Topsis; Electre; Promethee; Aras; Vikor; Dea;
b) Hybrid Methods Based on Fuzzy Theory.

The issue of prioritizing valuable villages is inherently complex. Therefore, WSM, ARAS, and VIKOR methods are not sufficiently adequate for determining the solution. On the other hand, prioritizing valuable villages is a multifaceted issue with diverse goals and numerous options. Consequently, methods like WPM, AHP, ANP, ELECTRE, and PROMETHEE face challenges with extensive calculations and reduced accuracy when dealing with problems that involve many options and criteria.  Conversely, the TOPSIS and DEA methods can address the prioritization of valuable villages because they can solve complex, multi-criteria, multi-option, multi-objective, multi-dimensional, and multi-scale problems. However, the DEA method requires knowledge of the impact of criteria on the goal, and finding the quantitative value that represents the criteria's impact on the goal is a challenge that limits the application of DEA in solving the prioritization issue of valuable villages. Ultimately, the TOPSIS method is a suitable approach for solving the given problem, but it also has drawbacks, such as the complexity of the decision-making process and the need to set weight coefficients (criteria prioritization coefficients).
Finally, it is suggested that the challenge of weight coefficients be addressed by drawing inspiration from the TOPSIS method and incorporating a search algorithm to determine the valuable village for each criterion. On the other hand, the MDBD method is a newer approach for solving multi-criteria decision-making problems and is considered an enhanced version of the TOPSIS method. Compared to TOPSIS, it offers advantages such as simplicity in decision-making, no need for prioritization coefficients, and the ability to solve multi-objective problems.
 The MDBD method does not require setting weight coefficients, as precise adjustment of weight coefficients is another challenge in solving multi-criteria decision-making problems that directly affects the decision-making process.
 
Conclusion
Considering villages' valuable attributes, the appropriate methods for prioritizing them in sequence are the MDBD, the TOPSIS, and the DEA methods. Utilizing these methodologies enables the resolution of complex, multi-criteria, multi-option, multi-scale, multi-objective, and multi-dimensional prioritization challenges.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Prioritization
  • Village
  • Value
  • Conservation
  • Prioritization Method
  1. اصلانی، احسان؛ شهریاری، سید کمال‌الدین و ذبیحی, حسین. (1399). اولویت‌بندی جاذبه‌های گردشگری شهر یزد بر مبنای تحلیل امکان‌سنجی توسعه. مجله گردشگری شهری، 7(2)، 19-35. doi: 10.22059/jut.2020.285790.688
  2. پورجوهری، امیرحسین. (۱۳۹۸). تجارب و رویکردهای مرمت و احیا روستاهای تاریخی در ایران و جهان. تهران: انتشارات بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی.
  3. جلایر، فرزانه. (1391). روستاهای تاریخی ایران (جلد 1). تهران: انتشارات بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی.
  4. حیدری، حسین؛ شکیبا، احمد؛ مداحی، جواد؛ کبیری، سعید و جهانی دولت‌آباد، اسماعیل. (1403). نیازسنجی و اولویت‌بندی نیازهای اجتماعات محلی با رویکرد ارزیابی مشارکتی روستایی (موردمطالعه: شهرستان ملکشاهی، استان ایلام). مجله پژوهش‌های روستائی، 15(2)، 298-315. doi: 10.22059/jrur.2024.344068.1849
  5. روستایی، شهریور؛ ناصری، رقیه و پاشایی، سعید. (1396). اولویت‌بندی راهبردهای احیای بافت تاریخی شهر مراغه با تأکید بر رویکرد بازآفرینی فرهنگ مدار. مجله گردشگری شهری، 4(3)، 77-94. doi: 10.22059/jut.2018.200781.176.
  6. ریاحی مقدم، ساشا؛ طالبیان، محمدحسن و محمدمرادی، اصغر. (1400). واکاوی مؤلفه‌های مؤثر بر طبقه‌بندی آثار میراث معماری بر اساس رویکردها و سیاست‌های حفاظت در کشورهای اروپا. مجله مطالعات معماری ایران، 10(20)، 213-237. doi:10.22052/jias.2022.111877.
  7. زرگر، اکبر. (1386). درآمدی بر شناخت معماری روستایی ایران. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
  8. سامه، رضا و باباخانی، ملیحه. (1401). مفهوم ارزش و مبانی سنجش آن در بافت‌های روستایی. مجله باغ نظر، 19، (116)، 84-71. doi: 10.22034/bagh.2022.349467.5218..
  9. سبحانی، نوبخت؛ بیرانوندزاده، مریم؛ شاهینی فر، مصطفی و معیری، دنیا. (1398). اولویت‌بندی فضاهای شهری اثرگذار در هویت شهری با استفاده از مدل‌های چند معیاره) مطالعه موردی: شهر بروجرد. فصلنامه جغرافیا (برنامه‌ریزی منطقه‌ای)، 9(3)، 495-507. DOR: 20.1001.1.22286462.1398.9.3.10.8
  10. سعیدی، عباس. (1399). برنامه‌ریزی کالبدی فضایی در راستای توسعه پایدار منظومه‌های روستایی شهری. تهران: انتشارات بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی.
  11. شکاری آرانی، ریحانه. (1394). اولویت‌بندی و شناسایی شاخص‌های تبیین‌کننده روستاهای دارای بافت باارزش روستایی مطالعه موردی (شهرستان نطنز). پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد رشته جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی. به راهنمایی مهدی پورطاهری، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  12. عنابستانی، علی‌اکبر و جوانشیری، مهدی. (1393). برنامه‌ریزی کالبدی سکونتگاههای روستایی در ایران. بجنورد: انتشارات جهانی.
  13. قلعه‌نویی، محمود؛ پیربابایی، محمدتقی؛ سلطان‌احمدی، الناز و محسن حقیقی؛ نسرین. بررسی اولویت‌بندی ارزش‌های میراث معماری و شهرسازی مجموعه میدان نقش‌جهان اصفهان. مجله مرمت و معماری ایران، 8 (16)، 39-50.  DOR: 20.1001.1.23453850.1397.8.16.2.9
  14. کاوه، فاطمه؛ وثیق، بهزاد و مهرکی زاده، محمد. (۱۳۹۹). سنجش و اولویت‌بندی کیفیت هویت در بافت تاریخی با استفاده از تکنیک Entropy-Topsis (مطالعه موردی: محله سنگ سیاه شیراز). نشریه علمی مرمت و معماری ایران، ۱۰ (۲۳)، ۸۲-۶۳.  10.52547/mmi.10.23.63: doi
  15. محمد مرادی، اصغر. (1396). سیر تحول اقدامات حفاظت و مرمت تا قبل از انقلاب اسلامی در ایران. چاپ اول، تهران: انتشارات مؤلف.
  16. محمدی، حمید. (1399)، راهنمای توسعه کالبدی سکونتگاه‌های روستایی منطقه البرز جنوبی. تهران: انتشارات بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی.
  17. مهدی زاده سراج، فاطمه. (1390). اولویت‌بندی بناهای تاریخی بر اساس ارزش آن‌ها، مجله بین‌المللی مهندسی معماری و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، (0) 2.
  18. یاری حصار، ارسطو؛ بوچانی، محمدحسین؛ مهدوی، داوود و پریشان، مجید. (1392). تدوین راهبردهای توسعه مدیریت روستایی ایران با استفاده از رویکرد برنامه‌ریزی استراتژیک.  مجله پژوهش‌های روستائی. (4)4. 714-691. doi: 10.22059/jrur.2013.50416.
  19. Anabastani, A., & Javanshiri, M. (2014). Physical planning of rural settlements in Iran. Bojnoord: Jahani Publishing.
  20. Aslani, E., Shahriari, S. K., & Zabihi, H. (2020). Prioritization of Tourism Attractions of Yazd City based on Development Feasibility Analysis. Journal of urban tourism7(2), 19-35. doi: 10.22059/jut.2020.285790.688. [In Persian]
  21. Falcão, A.P., Machete, R., Castilho Gomes, M., & Gonçalves, A.B. (2021). Spatial multi-criteria decision analysis for rehabilitation priority ranking: A collaborative application to heritage workforce housing sites. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 15(5), 790-806. DOI:10.1080/15583058.2019.1650132.
  22. Ghalehnoee, M., pirbabayi, M., soltanahmadi, E., & mohsen haghighi, N. (2019). Assessing the prioritization of cultural and urban heritages values of Naghshe- Jahan Square. Maremat & memari-e Iran, 8 (16), 39-50. DOR: 20.1001.1.23453850.1397.8.16.2.9. [In Persian]
  23. Green, H.L. (1998). The social construction of historical significance. In M.A. Tomlan (Ed.), Preservation of what, for whom? A critical look at historical significance. (pp. 85-94). Ithaca, NY: The National Council for Preservation Education.
  24. heidari, H., shakiba, A., Maddahi, J., Kabiri, S., & Jahani Dolatabad, E. (2024). Needs assessment and prioritization of the needs of local communities with rural participatory appraisal approach (case study: Malekshahi county, Ilam). Journal of Rural Research15(2), 298-315. doi: 10.22059/jrur.2024.344068.1849. [In Persian]
  25. Ismaeel, E.H. (2023). D&C technique as an MCDM tool for managing the heritage value assessment of historic buildings in post-war cities: Mosul Old City as a case study. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development.  https://doi.org/10.1108/jchmsd-03-2022-0042 .
  26. Jalayer, F. (2012). Historical villages of Iran. Tehran: bonyad-e- maskan enghelab-e- eslami Publishing. [In Persian]
  27. Kaliszewski, I., Miroforidis, J., & Podkopaev, D. (2016). Multiple criteria decision making by multiobjective. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. Vol. 242. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-32756-3.
  28. Kaveh, F., vasigh, B., & Mehrakizadeh, M. (2020). Measuring and Prioritizing the Quality of Identity in Historical Context Using the Entropy- Topsis Technique (Case Study: Sang-e-siyah Quarter). Maremat & memari-e Iran, 10 (23), 63-82. DOI:10.52547/mmi.10.23.63. [In Persian]
  29. Kilić Pamuković, J., Rogulj, K., Jajac, N., & Mastelić-Ivić, S. (2023). Model of priority ranking of cadastral parcels for planning the implementation of urban consolidation. Land, 12(1), 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010148.
  30. Kutut, V., Zavadskas, E.K., & Lazauskas, M. (2013). Assessment of Priority Options for Preservation of Historic City Centre Buildings using MCDM (ARAS). Procedia Engineering, 57, 657-661. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROENG.2013.04.083.
  31. Mai, J.E. (2004). Classification in context: Relativity, reality, and representation. Knowledge Organization, 31(1), 39-48.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288155691_Classification_in_Context_Relativity_Reality_and_Representation.
  32. Mehdizadeh Saradj, F. (2011). Prioritization of historic buildings based on their values, IJAUP, (0), 2. [In Persian]
  33. Mohammad Moradi, A. (2016). Evolution of protection and restoration measures before the Islamic revolution in Iran. Tehran: moalef Publishing. [In Persian]
  34. Mohammadi, H. (2019). Guide to the physical development of rural settlements in the southern Alborz region. Tehran: bonyad-e- maskan enghelab-e- eslami Publishing. [In Persian]
  35. Nermend, K. (2023). Multi-criteria and multi-dimensional analysis in decisions: decision making with preference vector methods (PVM) and vector measure construction methods (VMCM).Switzerland.Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40538-9
  36. Ortiz, R., & Ortiz, P. (2016). Vulnerability index: A new approach for preventive conservation of monuments. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 10(8), 1078-1100. DOI: 10.1080/15583058.2016.1186758.
  37. Pourjohari, A. (2018). Experiences and approaches of restoration and revitalization of historical villages in Iran and the world. Tehran: bonyad-e- maskan enghelab-e- eslami Publishing. [In Persian]
  38. Riahi Moghadam, S., Talebian, M., & Mohammad-Moradi, A. (2022). Key Criteria in the Classification of Architectural Heritage based on Approaches and Conservation Policies in European Countries. Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies10(20), 213-237. doi: 10.22052/jias.2022.111877. [In Persian]
  39. Rogulj, K., Kilić Pamuković, J., Antucheviciene, J., & Zavadskas, E.K. (2022). Intuitionistic fuzzy decision support based on EDAS and grey relational degree for historic bridges reconstruction priority. Soft Computing, 26(18), 9419-9444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-022-07259-6.
  40. roustaei, S., naseri, R., & pashaie, S. (2017). Prioritizing the Revival Strategies of the Historical Context of Maragheh City with an Emphasis on the Culture-Based Recreation Approach. Journal of urban tourism4(3), 77-94. doi: 10.22059/jut.2018.200781.176. [In Persian]
  41. Ruiz-Jaramillo, J., Muñoz-González, C., Joyanes-Díaz, M.D., Jiménez-Morales, E., López-Osorio, J.M., Barrios-Pérez, R., & Rosa-Jiménez, C. (2020). Heritage risk index: A multi-criteria decision-making tool to prioritize municipal historic preservation projects. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 9(2), 403-418. DOI: 10.1016/j.foar.2019.10.003.
  42. Sahraiyan, F., & Olgac Turker, O. (2019). Values-based framework for prioritizing conservation of heritage buildings for tourism. Value of heritage for tourism conference, Leuven, Belgium.
  43. Saidi, A. (2019).Spatial physical planning in the direction of sustainable development of urban rural systems. Tehran: bonyad-e- maskan enghelab-e- eslami Publishing. [In Persian]
  44. Sameh, R., & Babakhani, M. (2023). The Concept of “Value” & Its Assessment Principles in Rural Fabrics. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar19(116), 71-84. doi: 10.22034/bagh.2022.349467.5218. [In Persian]
  45. Shekari Arani, R. (2014). Prioritizing and identifying explanatory indicators of villages with valuable rural texture (case study: Natanz city). Master's Thesis. Department of Geography and Rural Planning, Tehran.Tarbiat Modares University. [In Persian]
  46. sobhani, N., Beyranvandzadeh, M., sh, M., & m, D. (2019). Effective prioritization of urban spaces in urban identity using multi-criteria models (Case Study: Borujerd City). Geography (Regional Planning)9(35), 495-507. [In Persian]
  47. Triantaphyllou, E. (2000). Multi-criteria decision making methods: A comparative study.Boston, MA.Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3157-6
  48. Vodopivec, B., Žarnić, R., Tamošaitienė, J., Lazauskas M., & Šelih, J. (2014). Renovation priority ranking by multi-criteria assessment of architectural heritage: The case of castles. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 18:1, 88-100. DOI:10.3846/1648715X.2014.889771.
  49. Wey, W.-M., & Huang, Y.-Ch. (2013). A study of priority evaluation and resource allocation for revitalization of cultural heritages in the urban development. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 7(10), 2708-2714. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1088370.
  50. Yano, H. (2017). Interactive multiobjective decision making under uncertainty. Boca Raton.CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315466049
  51. Yarihesar, A., Boochani, M. H., Mahdavi, D., & Parishan, M. (2013). Formulation of Development Strategies in Rural Management of Iran Using Strategic Planning Approach. Journal of Rural Research4(4), 691-714. doi: 10.22059/jrur.2013.50416. [In Persian]
  52. Zargar, A. (2019). An introduction to the knowledge of rural architecture in Iran. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Publishing. [In Persian]