Prioritizing the guidelines and policies of the sustainable urban transportation

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University, Najaf Abad Branch, Najaf Abad, Iran

3 Department of Art and Architecture, Islamic Azad University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract

In this research authors rely on the descriptive-analytical method to identify and introduce the indicators of the sustainable transportation on the first step, and then on the next step we will prioritize the mentioned indicators in the opinion of the urban experts in order to implement the sustainable transportation. Accordingly, after introducing the goals and indicators of the sustainable transportation, we will classify the guidelines for the fulfillment of those goals and improvement of those indicators in 7 main group and 34 subgroups. Using a questionnaire, we have asked the opinions of 15 urban experts who are related to the urban transportation issues and problems. The study has used analytical hierarchical process model to weight the obtained factors. The results of this research show that the most important factors in achieving the sustainable transportation are “land use” and “public transportation” respectively. Among the subsets of the indicators, the most important factors are the “service hierarchy and access to planning”, “paying attention to the traffic effects of the land uses on the main roads”, “integration of the land uses” and “efficient management of the land separating system” respectively. Consequently, in order to reduce the transportation problems of Shiraz City the urban planners have to pay especial attention to the organization of the land uses, to the promotion of the public transportation system both qualitatively and quantitatively, and to the promotion of the urban management in general.

Keywords


Asian Development Bank, (2010). Sustainable transport initiative, operational plan, Asian Development Bank (ADB), 36.

Asqarpure, M.J., (2011). Multi-criteria decision making. University of Tehran, Tehran,Iran. 397.

Awasthi, A.; Satyaveer S.C., (2011). Using AHP and dumpster-Shafer theory for evaluating sustainable transport solutions. Environ. Modell. Software. 26(6): 787-796.

Bnnnui, A.; Rattanamanee, P.; Puetpaiboon, U.; Phukpattaranont, P.; Chetpattananondh, K., (2007). Site selection for large wind turbine using GIS." International conference on engineering and environment", Cedar Falls, Iowa, United States.

Boschmann, E. E.; Mei-Po K., (2008). Toward socially sustainable urban transportation: progress and potentials. Int. J. Sustainable. Transp., 2(3): 138–157.

Deakin, E., (2003). Sustainable Development and Sustainable Transportation: Strategies for Economic Prosperity, Environment Quality and Equity. Working Paper, Berkeley: University of California.

Goldman, T.; Roger G., (2006). Sustainable urban transport: Four innovative directions." Technol. Society, 28: 261–273.

Haghshenas, H.; Manouchehr, V., (2012). Urban sustainable transportation indicators for global comparison. Ecol. Indic.15(1): 115-121.

Kennedy, C.; Miller, E.; Shalaby, A.; Maclean, H.; Coleman, J., (2005). The Four Pillars of Sustainable Urban Transportation. Transp. Rev., 25(4): 393-414.

Litman, T., (2003). Reinventing transportation exploring the paradigm shift needed to reconcile transportation and sustainability objectives.", 256.

Litman, T.; Burwell. D (2006). Issues in sustainable transportation. Int. J. Global. Environ., 6(4):331-347.

Loo, B.P.; Chow. S. Y., (2006). Sustainable urban transportation: concepts, policies, And methodologies. Urban. Plann. Dev., 132(2): 76-79.

Qodsipur, S.H.; (2011). Analytical hierarchy process,Tehran: Amirkabir University of Technology, 215.

Tara, R.; Zietsman, J.; Eisele, W.; Duane, R.; Spillane, D.; Bochner, B.; (2009). Developing sustainable transportation performance measures for Txdot’s strategic plan: technical report. technical report, Texas transportation institute the Texas A&M University System. 215.

Reisi, M.; Aye, L.; Rajabifard, A.; Ngo, T.; (2014). Transport sustainability index: Melbourne case study. Ecol. Indic., 3(4): 288-296.

Rodenburg, C. A; Ubbels, B.; Nijkamp, P.; (2002). Policy Scenarios for Achieving Sustainable Transportaition in Europe. Transp. Rev., 22(4): 449-472.

Shiau, T.A; (2012). Evaluating sustainable transport strategies with incomplete information for Taipei City. Transp. Res. 17(6): 427-432.

Shiftan, Y.; Kaplan, S.; Hakkert S.; (2003). Scenario building as a tool for planning a sustainable transportation system. Transp. Res., 8(5); 323-342.

Verma, A.; Rahul, T.M.; Dixit, M.; (2014). Sustainability impact assessment of transportation policies a case study for Bangalore city. Case Stud. Transp. Policy, 3: 321-330.

Xenias, D.; Whitmarsh, L., (2013). Dimensions and determinants of expert and public attitudes to sustainable transport policies and technologies. Transp. Res. Part A, 48, 75-85.

Yigitcanlar, T.; Fabian, L.; Coiacetto, E., (2008). Challenges to Urban Transport Sustainability and Smart Transport in a Tourist City: The Gold Coast, Australia.Open Transp. J., 2: 29-46.

Zietsman, J.; Rilett, L. R., (2002). Sustainable Transportation: Conceptualization and Performance Measures. Texas: Texas Transportation Institute-The Texas A&M University. 215.