چکیده:
سفرهای روزانه بین مراکز روستایی و نقاط شهری پدیده‌ای است که در همة کشورها، با تفاوت‌هایی برخاسته از ساختارهای اقتصادی و اجتماعی آن‌ها، مشاهده می‌شود. در کشور ما نیز این پدیده، با توجه به گسترش مناطق کلان‌شهری و مسائل و مشکلات، از جمله گرانی مسکن، رو به افزایش است. تاکنون آمار رسمی از این تعداد جمعیت منتشر نشده است. در سرشماری سال 1385 اولین تلاش برای بررسی این جمعیت انجام شد. در این بررسی با استفاده از تحلیل اکتشافی و به‌کارگیری آمارهای فضایی سعی شد این پدیده از نظر مکانی و توزیع فضایی پیرامون کلان‌شهر تهران بررسی شود. رفت‌وآمد روزانه برای کار یا تحصیل در سطح روستاهای کلان‌شهر تهران در سه وضعیت مراجعه از روستا به شهر، از روستا به روستا، و از شهر به روستا بررسی و مشخص شد، دو خوشة بزرگ در جنوب تهران مهم‌ترین مراکز فرستندة جمعیت برای کار یا تحصیل به نقاط شهری‌اند؛ یعنی بخش‌هایی از ری، پاکدشت، رباط‌کریم، و شهریار. مهم‌ترین قطب فرستندة جمعیت به نقاط روستایی برای کار یا تحصیل نیز شهرستان پاکدشت است. مراجعة جمعیت از نقاط شهری به نقاط روستایی نشان می‌دهد این مقادیر برای کل منطقة کلان‌شهر تهران الگویی تصادفی دارد. به عبارت دیگر، مراکز خاصی با این خصیصه در کلان‌شهر تهران وجود ندارد؛ ولی نقاط شهری رودهن، پردیس، پیشوا، پاکدشت، بومهن، نصیرآباد، و شاهدشهر بیشترین جمعیت را به نقاط روستایی برای کار یا تحصیل می‌فرستند.
چکیده انگلیسی:
Introduction Commuting between urban centers and rural areas is a phenomenon that observed in all countries with different social and economic structure. Commuting is a new phenomenon in move of population that emerged with metropolis development. This phenomenon is different with other population movement. Because this move does not change in residential place, population work in other place. There are two reasons for commuting. First, people change their house but not change employment. Or people change their work but not change their house. Relationships between urban areas and rural areas and live in villages and work in urban areas are a dominant pattern in rural and urban integration. Research on spatial patterns of commuting to work has become an important issue in urban studies. Centralization and decentralization in the population of the metropolitan complex patterns and travel to work and residence within the metropolitan suburbs are among the most important phenomenon in the big cities. Many studies in the past decades deal with the dynamics of commuting. According to the 2006 census, commuting for metropolis of the country as one of the questions were asked from the households. This phenomenon is observed in the rural population around of metropolis areas and based on the Censusreport; this phenomenon can be seen in rural areas than in urban areas. According to the Census Bureau Report, about one-eighth of 10 years old and over of population in 2006 census had the commute. An attempt to study spatial clusters of this phenomenon in Tehran metropolis, what is these phenomena between surrounding rural population in metropolis and Tehran metropolis? And what is their spatial distribution?
Methodology In this study to analysis of commuting in metropolis area, the analysis of spatial data exploration and spatial statistics was used. The analytical unit in this study is dehestan and data was taken from SCI that is about of place of work and education. Commuting for work and education in Tehran metropolis area investigated in three levels: 1. rural area to urban centers, 2. urban centers to rural area, and 3. rural area to rural area. For analysis of spatial data exploration and spatial statistics used of spatial autocorrelation (moran) and High/ Low cluster (Getis– ord General) methods, inverse distance entered for of distance analysis.
Results Research findings show that rural area to urban centers commuting is an important pattern in Tehran Metropolis. According to results of this study parts of Rey, Pakdasht, Robatkarim and Shahriar are two important clusters that send commuters of rural area to urban centers. Morans index for this pattern is 0.1, Z value is 2.7 and significant level is 0.005. Two largest population centersin the south and southeast of Tehran Metropolis include Varamin, Pakdasht and Robat Karim are two centers that transmitter rural population to the rural areas for working or studying. The center currently has the highest population growth in the metropolis area and the largest emitters of the Tehran urban areas to rural areas are considered. Rural populations that for work or study go to other rural areas in Tehran metropolis areas how that Pakdashtand parts of Varamin region has the highest rural population characteristics within themselves. The median age is 27 years. Fern-Abad villages, Fylestan, Sharif Abad, Ghanyabad are the largest senders of population from rural to urban and urban to rural was considered. Distances from the main city showed that distance has direct impact on commuting population. For this pattern morans index equal to 0.1, Z vale is 3.08 and significant level is 0.002 that show one cluster pattern for rural area to other rural area commuting. Commuting of Urban to rural area is random and not found a pattern for it. But Rudehen, Pardis, Pishva, Pakdasht, Boomhen, Nasirabad, Shahedshahr are important centers with highest commuter in Tehran metropolis area.
Conclusion In this study, we try to show commuting pattern around of Tehran metropolis. The results show there is relation between three pattern of commuting around of Tehran metropolis, due to expansion of metropolis area and the problems such as housing price and rent is growing has caused that rural area around the metropolis to become dormitory settlements. According to result of this study parts of Rey, Pakdasht, Robatkarim and Shahriarare two important clusters that send commuters of rural area to urban. Pakdast is important county in send rural commuters to other rural area. Commuting of Urban to rural area is random and not found a pattern for it.
References Asgari, Ali (2012). Spatial analaysis with Arc GIS, Organization for IT Tehran Municipality. Champion T. (2001). Urbanization, suburbanisation, counterurbanization and reurbanization, in Handbook of Urban Studies Ed. R Paddison (Sage, London), 143- 161. Dessemontet, P., Kaufmann, V., Jemelin, C. (2010). Switzerland as a Single Metropolitan Area? A Study of Its Commuting Network. Urban Studies, 13- 47. Duranton, G.; Puga, D. (2004). Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies. In Handbook of regional and urban economics, vol. 4, J.V. Henderson, and J. F. Thisse, 2063–2117. Netherlands: North-Holland. Faggian, A.; McCann, P. (2009). Human capital, graduate migration and innovation in British Regions. Cambridge Journal of Economics 33, 317- 333. Fuchs, R.; Demko, G. (1987). Commuting in the USSR and Eastern Europe: causes, characteristics and consequences, East European Quarterly 11 463-475. Goetz, S.J.; Han, Y.; Findeis, J.; Brasier, K.J. (2010). US commuting networks and economic growth: Measurement and implications for spatial policy. Growth and Change (Special Issue on Best Practices in Rural Development and Policy 41(2): 276–302. Hajipour, Khalil (2008). Investigating the factors affecting the process of the formation and development of metropolitan areas, Fine arts,vol 34, pp 37-48. Mark W. Horner (2004). Spatial Dimensions of Urban Commuting: A Review of Major Issues and Their Implications for Future Geographic Research, The Professional Geographer, 56:2, 160-17. Mieszkowski, P.; Mills, E. (1993). The causes of metropolitan suburbanization, Journal of Economic Perspectives 7, pp. 135 – 147. Nasehi, Ismaeil et al. (2008). Commuting population in iran, Statistical center of Iran. Partridge, M.D.; Rickman, D.S.; Ali, K.; Olfert M.R. (2008). Lost in space: Population dynamics in the American Hinterlands and small cities. Journal of Economic Geography 8(6): 727–757. Partridge, Mark D.; MD Kamar Ali; M. Rose Olfert (2010). Rural-to-Urban Commuting: Three Degrees of Integration, Growth and Change Vol. 41 No. 2, June; pp. 303–335. Sandow, Erika (2008). Commuting behaviour in sparsely populated areas: evidence from northern Sweden, Journal of Transport Geography 16, 14–27. Savitch, H.; Vogel, K. (2000). Paths to New Regionalism (Symposium Editors), State and Local Government Review, Vol. 32, N0. 3, 158-168. Sjoberge (1992). Underurbanisation and the zero urban growth hypotheses: diverted migration in Albania, Geografiska Annaler 74B 3 -19. Statistical center of Iran (2006). Census of Population and Housing. Tammaru, Tiit (2005). Suburbanisation, employment change, and commuting in the Tallinn metropolitan area, Environment and Planning A, volume 37, pp 1669 – 1687. van den Berg, L.; Drewett, R.; Klaassen, L.; Rossi, A.; Vijverberg, C. (1982). A Study of Growth and Decline (Pergamon Press, Oxford). Whitener, L.A.; Parker, T. (2007). Policy option for a changing rural America. Amber Waves 3 (2), 65- 68.
خبرنامه
برای ثبت نام در خبرنامه و دریافت خبرنامه ایمیل خود را وارد نمایید.
