Assessing the impact of type of ownership on residential mobility case study: narmak district of Tehran

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/01/2015
Views (169) Download (5)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Assessing the impact of type of ownership on residential mobility case study: narmak district of Tehran

Mohammad Reza Daroudi, Marieh Barzegaran
J. Bio. Env. Sci.6( 1), 707-717, January 2015.
Certificate: JBES 2015 [Generate Certificate]

Abstract

One aspect of the dynamics of the city is relocation of households from one location to the other residential neighborhoods within the city. This relocating, which has a great impact on the structure of the city, has a variety of reasons. Assessment of the reasons of households’ residential relocation, considering that it is resultant from the concept of residential satisfaction or dissatisfaction, is very complex. However, this relocation depends on the type of possession can be done according to the criteria and factors taken from the people. Therefore, present study aimed to analyze and prioritize the importance of residential relocation indicators, with emphasis on the household possession on Narmak District of Tehran. To determine the sample size of the study, the Cochran relationship has been used and 175 questionnaires were distributed in the neighborhood. Furthermore, to set the priority of relocation indicators in two dimensions (owner/tenant), Entropy &SAW method is used. The results indicate the high affinity of owners with higher education and low affinity of unemployed owners for residential relocation (This may be due to fear of losing ownership of their housing units during the fluctuations in the housing market).Tenants also having a high income tend to have successive relocation. Conversely, Tenants who are unemployed and have low income prefer to stay in a residential environment as possible.

VIEWS 4

Abdi Daneshpour Z. 1999. Analysis of the spatial inequality in cities, Safeh journal, published by the Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning of ShahidBeheshti University, 29, ninth year

Abdul Mohit M, Ibrahim M, Razidah Rashid Y. 2010. Assessment of residential satisfaction in newly designed public low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia”; J. Habitat International, 34, 18-27.

Adriaanse CCM. 2007. Measuring residential satisfaction: a residential environmental satisfaction scale (RESS). Journal of housing and built environment, 22, 287–304.

Alkay, Elif. 2011. The Residential Mobility Pattern in the Istanbul Metropolitan Area, Housing Studies, 26 (4), 521–539.

Aluko O. 2011. The Effects of Location and Neighborhood Attributes on Housing Values in Metropolitan Lagos. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management , 4(2), 69-82.

Brandstetter MCG, de O. 2011. Consumer Behavior Analysis of Real Estate Market with Emphasis in Residential Mobility, Choice and Satisfaction Brazilian Cases, The Built & Human Environment Review, 4(1),56-80

Brower S. 2003. Designing for community. College Park: University of Maryland Press.

Clark W. 2006. Mobility, housing stress, and neighborhood contexts: evidence from Los Angeles, Environment and Planning A, 38, 1077–1093.

Coulter R, van Ham M, Feijten P. 2011. Partner (dis)agreement on moving desires and the subsequent moving behaviour of couples. Population, Space and Place, Early View, 1-15. DOI: 10.1002/psp.700.

Daniel S, Sally Ann Sh. 2012.The Psychological Context of Residential Mobility and Well-Being,6(2).

Dieleman F. 2001. The geography of residential turnover in twenty-seven large US metropolitan housing markets, Urban Studies, 37(2), 223–245.

Dieleman FM, Clark WAV, Deurloo MC. 2000. The Geography of Residential Turnover in 27 large US Metropolitan Housing Markets, 1985–1995, Urban Studies, 37(2), 223–245.

Djebuarni R, Al-Abed A. 2000. Satisfaction Level with Neighborhood in Low-Income Public Housing in Yemen. Property Management , 18 (4), 230–242.

Forbers,j IML, Roberston. 1978. Intra-urban Migration in Greater Glasgow; paper given to the population studies Group of the institute of British geographers Glasgow, September, 32-45.

Hafeznia M. 2003. Introduction to Research Methodology in the Humanities, SAMT publisher, Tehran.

Lin HF. 2009. An application of fuzzy AHP for evaluating course website quality. Computers & Education.

Lu M. 1999. Analyzing Migration Decisionmaking: Relationships between Residential Satisfaction, Mobility Intensions, and Moving Behavior, Environment and Planning A, 30, 1473–1495.

Mendoza GA, Martins H. 2006. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management , A critical review of methods and new modeling paradigms, 230,1-22.

Mohit MA. 2010. Assessment of Residential Satisfaction in Newly Designed Public Low-Cost Housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Habitat International, 34, 18–27

Pourahmad A, Farhoudi R, Habibi K, Keshavarz M. 2011. the role of environmental quality of residential place in Urban Migration (Case Study: Old Khorramabad); Human Geography Research, 75.

Safayipour M, Sajadi J. 2008. Social and spatial causes and consequences of urban migration in Ahvaz (case strudy: Kian Pars) Journal of Isfahan University (Humanities), volume twenty-ninth. 1.

Shalyn C. 1993. urban dynamics, translated by Nazarian A.,. First Edition, Mashhad: Astan Qods Razavi Press.

Vlist AJ, van der. 2006. Residential Mobility and Commuting. PhD dissertation, Vrije Universities, Amsterdam.