Ranking Landscape Architecture Indicators Affecting the Improvement of Visual Environmental Quality in Urban Parks of Tabriz Metropolis: An Ecological, Cultural, Environmental Sustainability, and Accessibility Perspective Using the TOPSIS Method
Keywords:
Landscape architecture, visual environment quality, urban park, Citizen satisfaction, Tabriz, green space, spatial justiceAbstract
The study aims to evaluate and rank the landscape architecture indicators influencing the visual quality of urban parks in Tabriz, focusing on ecological, cultural, environmental sustainability, and accessibility dimensions. This research employed a descriptive–analytical and mixed-method design. Data were collected through questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and field observations. The statistical population consisted of users of six selected parks in Tabriz, from which a stratified random sample of 400 participants was determined using Cochran’s formula. Data were analyzed through multi-criteria decision-making models including TOPSIS and ANP. The results indicated that “ecological quality” and “cultural features” carried the highest relative weights in enhancing visual quality. El-Goli Park ranked first due to its high biodiversity, efficient resource management, and cultural–historical significance. Baghmisheh, Shams Tabrizi, and Baghlare Baghi Parks followed, showing relatively stronger performance. Eram and Khaghani Parks were ranked lowest, primarily because of weaknesses in sustainability, accessibility, and social participation. Improving visual quality and enhancing the social and environmental functions of Tabriz’s urban parks require prioritizing the diversification of native vegetation, strengthening cultural and social programs, developing sustainable energy and waste management infrastructures, and ensuring equitable accessibility, especially for people with disabilities. This approach can foster stronger urban identity, improve quality of life, and promote equal public use of green spaces.
Downloads
References
1. Abraham A, Sommerhalder K, Abel T. Landscape and well-being: a scoping study on the health-promoting impact of outdoor environments. International journal of public health. 2010;55:59-69.
2. Taghvai SHN, Maleki S, Alidoust S. The Role of the Everyday Landscape in the Quality of Urban Spaces. Case Study: The Path of the Female Dormitory at Shahid Beheshti University. Safd. 2017;26(27):55-72.
3. Akpınar A. How perceived sensory dimensions of urban green spaces are associated with teenagers' perceived restoration, stress, and mental health? Landscape and Urban Planning. 2021;207:104020.
4. Narouei, Il. Evaluating Users' Visual and Aesthetic Preferences of Urban Park Landscapes (Case Study: Sayyad Shirazi Urban Park in Birjand). Human and Environment. 2021;19(2):201-19.
5. Akbari O. Assessing the Suitability of the Spatial Distribution of Tabriz Urban Parks from the Perspective of the Sphere of Influence Using Remote Sensing and GIS. Journal of Renewable Natural Resources Research. 2021;12(1):83-94.
6. Ginzarly M, Houbart C, Teller J. The Historic Urban Landscape approach to urban management: a systematic review. International Journal of Heritage Studies. 2019;25(10):999-1019.
7. Ma'rouf M, Hatamzadeh A, Kaveh H. Improving the Landscape of Urban Parks Based on Citizens' Needs (A Case Study of Gorgan Parks). Sustainable Architecture and Urbanism. 2021;11(3):197-207.
8. Mell IC. Green infrastructure: concepts, perceptions and its use in spatial planning: Newcastle University; 2010.
9. Bayatmaku S. Biophilic Design Efficiency on Humans' Well-being in Daily Life with an Atmospheric Approach. İstanbul: Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı, Mimari Tasarım Bilim Dalı; 2022.
10. Felix M, Elhefnawi M. Landscape design elements as a defensive tool for building security. Urban and Transit Planning: A Culmination of Selected Research Papers from IEREK Conferences on Urban Planning, Architecture and Green Urbanism, Italy and Netherlands (2017): Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 227-38.
11. Abdelhamid MM, Elfakharany MM. Improving urban park usability in developing countries: Case study of Al-Shalalat Park in Alexandria. Alexandria Engineering Journal. 2020;59(1):311-21.
12. Bahriny F, Bell S. Patterns of urban park use and their relationship to factors of quality: A case study of Tehran, Iran. Sustainability. 2020;12(4):1560.
13. Hansen G. Basic principles of landscape design. Florida: University of Florida; 2010. 1-12 p.
14. Huang ASH, Lin YJ. The effect of landscape colour, complexity and preference on viewing behaviour. Landscape Research. 2020;45(2):214-27.
15. Dinda S, Ghosh S. Perceived benefits, aesthetic preferences and willingness to pay for visiting urban parks: A case study in Kolkata, India. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks. 2021;9(1):36-50.
16. Alidousti Masouleh S, Bamanian MR, Haghighatbin M. Applying Space Syntax to Analyze Behavioral Settings: A Case Study of Neighborhood Parks in District 5 of Tehran Municipality. Naqsh-e Jahan (Role of the World). 2021;11(4):2-24.
17. Nikourai, Mansouri, Haqqjou, Shaghaghi, Shahriar. Evaluating the Effective Factors for the Preservation and Revitalization of Agricultural Lands and Gardens (A Case Study of Lak-dizaj, Tabriz). Journal of Geographic Engineering. 2024;8(3).
18. Harnik P. Urban green: Innovative parks for resurgent cities: Island Press; 2012.
19. Deng L, Li X, Luo H, Fu EK, Ma J, Sun LX, et al. Empirical study of landscape types, landscape elements and landscape components of the urban park promoting physiological and psychological restoration. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2020;48:126488.
20. Bazrafshan M, Tabrizi AM, Bauer N, Kienast F. Place attachment through interaction with urban parks: A cross-cultural study. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2021;61:127103.
21. Rafi ZN, Kazemi F, Tehranifar A. Public preferences toward water-wise landscape design in a summer season. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2020;48:126563.
22. Montazer al H, Sharifnejad. Effective Factors on Users' Perception of the Environmental Quality of Public Leisure Spaces: A Case Study of Yazd City Parks. Quarterly Journal of Urban Studies. 2016;5(20):17-28.
23. Jim CY, Chen SS. Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape ecology principles in compact Nanjing city, China. Landscape and urban planning. 2003;65(3):95-116.
24. Escalera-Reyes J. Place attachment, feeling of belonging and collective identity in socio-ecological systems: Study case of Pegalajar (Andalusia-Spain). Sustainability. 2020;12(8):3388.
25. Alpak EM, Özkan DG, Düzenli T. Systems approach in landscape design: a studio work. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2018;28:593-611.
26. Hami A. Evaluating the Indicators of Urban Public Landscape Quality. Environmental Planning. 2021(55).
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 پریزاد فاخریان (نویسنده); امیر حق جو; حسن ابراهیمی اصل, شهریار شقاقی (نویسنده)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
