A new approach towards the sustainability of urban-rural integration: The development strategy for central villages in the Abbasiya District of Iraq using GIS techniques

doi:10.1016/j.regsus2023.02.004

Abstract

Abstract:

The development of rural areas usually has a positive impact on the urban-rural integration. This study explores an innovative approach to stimulate rural development by proposing qualified villages as central villages that can provide basic urban services for their residents and residents of neighboring villages. This approach can contribute to overcoming the various problems that rural areas faced at the social, economic, and environmental levels. It seeks to achieve spatial sustainability of rural areas, representing a new approach by integrating urban development methods to revitalize rural villages. The study analyzed 15 villages belonging to Abbasiya District of AL Kufa City in the Najaf Governorate of Iraq. Based on the GIS techniques and the analysis of urban service indicators (village population, percentage of urban building materials used in villages, distance between village and health centers, distance between village and main roads, nature of economic activity, distance between village and educational institutions, distance between village and drinking water sources, number of communication towers, and distance between village and urban administrative center), this study proposed that Abu Gharb and Albu Ghraib can served as central villages in Abbasiya District in the future. This study establishes a new rural spatial structure to achieve rural sustainable development, improves the development status of rural areas, and provides a theoretical basis for the government and relevant institutions to use urban service indicators, achieving rural sustainable development and formulating relevant development policies in Abbasiya District.

Key words: Central villages, Spatial reorganization, Rural sustainable, Development, Urban-rural integration, Urban service, Abbasiya District, Iraq

Ahmed Hussein ALLAWI, Haider Mohammed Jawad AL-JAZAERI. A new approach towards the sustainability of urban-rural integration: The development strategy for central villages in the Abbasiya District of Iraq using GIS techniques[J]. Regional Sustainability, 2023, 4(1): 28-43.

Figures/Tables 16

Fig. 1.

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 9.

Fig. 10.

Table 5

Fig. 11.

References 31

[1]	Al-Dujaili A.M., 2005. Characteristics of agricultural production in the district of Kufa, Ali Mahdi Al-Dujaili. Journal of Geographical Research. 5, 259-289 (in Arabic).
[2]	Ali H., 2020. The volumetric hierarchy for the cities of the urban system in Al-Anbar Governorate (2007-2019). Humanities and Social Sciences. 47(2), 319-341 (in Arabic).
[3]	Al-Kalabi A.A.B.J., 2020. Planning policies to address the phenomenon of slums in the Al-Najaf Governorate. MSc Thesis. Najaf: College of Urban Planning, University of Kufa (in Arabic).
[4]	Allawi A.H., 2022. Towards smart trends for tourism development and its role in the place sustainability-Karbala region, a case study. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning. 931-939.
[5]	Alshari E.A., Gawali B.W., 2021. Development of classification system for LULC using remote sensing and GIS. Global Transitions Proceedings. 2(1), 8-17.‏
[6]	Cao Y., Li G.Y., Cao Y.,el al., 2020. Distinct types of restructuring scenarios for rural settlements in a heterogeneous rural landscape: Application of a clustering approach and ecological niche modeling. Habitat Int. 104, 102248, doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102248. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102248
[7]	Guo Y., Xiao Y., Yuan Q.F., 2017. The redevelopment of peri-urban villages in the context of path-dependent land institution change and its impact on Chinese inclusive urbanization: The case of Nanhai, China. Cities. 60, 466-475.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2016.05.010
[8]	Hameed A.M., 2014. A geographical analysis of agricultural pests affecting agricultural production in the district of Kufa. Uruk for Humanities. 7(4), 315-344.
[9]	Jacob J., Hasan N., 2016. Determining the centers of economic growth and regional development using scalogram analysis (An empirical study in west Halmahera regency, Indonesia). IOSR Journal of Economics and Finance. 7(4), 31-36.
[10]	Jeong J.S., García-Moruno L., Hernández-Blanco J., et al., 2017. Identifying priority areas for rural housing development using the participatory multi-criteria and contingent valuation methods in Alange reservoir area, Central Extremadura (Spain). J. Rural Stud. 50, 117-128.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.01.006
[11]	Kapoor S., Baghel S.S., 2016. Sustainable development of villages: A case example of village in Mathura district. In: 2016 IEEE Technological Innovations in ICT for Agriculture and Rural Development (TIAR). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Chennai, India, 133-138.
[12]	Khorasani M., Zarghamfard M., 2018. Analyzing the impacts of spatial factors on livability of peri-urban villages. Soc. Indic. Res. 136(2), 693-717.‏ doi: 10.1007/s11205-016-1546-4
[13]	Li Y.R., Fan P.C., Liu Y.S., 2019. What makes better village development in traditional agricultural areas of China? Evidence from long-term observation of typical villages. Habitat Int. 83, 111-124.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2018.11.006
[14]	Liu Y.L., Luo T., Liu Z.Q., et al., 2015. A comparative analysis of urban and rural construction land use change and driving forces: Implications for urban-rural coordination development in Wuhan, Central China. Habitat Int. 47, 113-125.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.01.012
[15]	Liu Y.S., 2018. Research on the urban-rural integration and rural revitalization in the new era in China. Acta Geographica Sinica. 73(4), 637-650. ‏ (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/dlxb201804004
[16]	Lyu P., Yu M., Hu Y.R., 2020. Contradictions in and improvements to urban and rural residents’ housing rights in China’s urbanization process. Habitat Int. 97, 102101, doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.102101. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.102101
[17]	Ma C., Jiang Y., Qi K., 2021. Investigating the urban-rural integrated town development strategy on the basis of the study of rural forms in Nantong, China. Front. Archit. Res. 10(1), 190-201.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.foar.2020.06.001
[18]	Ministry of Planning, Central Statistical Organization, Najaf Statistics Directorate, 2022a. Annual Statistical Summary. [2022-12-30]. https://cosit.gov.iq/ar/en/1219-2018-16 (in Arabic).
[19]	Ministry of Planning, Najaf Planning Directorate, Studies and Development Projects Division, 2022b. Spatial Development Plans for the Governorates until 2020, Annual Report. [2022-12-30]. https://cutt.us/xrO3w (in Arabic).
[20]	Murtadho A., Pravitasari A.E., Munibah K., et al., 2020. Spatial distribution pattern of village development index in Karawang Regency using spatial autocorrelation approach. J. Pembang. Wil. Dan Kota. 16, 102-111.‏
[21]	Rugel E.J., Chow C.K., Corsi D.J., et al., 2022. Developing indicators of age-friendly neighbourhood environments for urban and rural communities across 20 low-, middle-, and high-income countries. BMC Public Health. 22(1), 1-16.‏ doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-12274-7
[22]	Sahdev S., Kumar M., 2020. Land use planning for hillside development using GIS based analytic hierarchy process. J. Settl. Spat. Plan. 29-39.‏
[23]	Tang C.G., He Y.H., Zhou G.H., et al., 2018. Optimizing the spatial organization of rural settlements based on life quality. J. Geogr. Sci. 28(5), 685-704.‏ doi: 10.1007/s11442-018-1499-4
[24]	Tuitjer G., Steinführer A., 2021. The scientific construction of the village. Framing and practicing rural research in a trend study in Germany, 1952-2015. J. Rural Stud. 82, 489-499.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.12.006
[25]	Turoff M., Linstone H.A., 2002. The Delphi Method-Techniques and Applications. Olaf Helmer: University of Southern California, 4-5.
[26]	Uwayezu E., de Vries W.T., 2022. Exploring the connection between spatial justice and land tenure security: insights from inclusive urban (re)development schemes in Recife, Brazil. GeoJournal. 87, 3365-3386.
[27]	Wei C., Zhang Z., Ye S., et al., 2021. Spatial-temporal divergence and driving mechanisms of urban-rural sustainable development: An empirical study based on provincial panel data in China. Land. 10(10), 1027, doi:‏10.3390/land10101027. doi: ?10.3390/land10101027
[28]	World Health Organization, 2015. Measuring the Age-Friendliness of Cties: A Guide to Using Core Indicators. [2022-11-25].https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/203830/9789241509695_eng.pdf.
[29]	Yakubu I., 2021. From a cluster of villages to a city: Housing politics and the dilemmas of spatial planning in Tamale, Ghana. Land Use Pol. 109, 105668, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105668. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105668
[30]	Yang J., Jiang W., Wang W., 2011. Reflection on plan and architecture design of new countryside in Ningbo. In: 2011 International Conference on Multimedia Technology. Hangzhou: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 4042-4050.‏
[31]	Yang X.Q., 2016. Analysis on China’s urban-rural integration: The perspective of path-dependence. Open Journal of Social Sciences. 4(2), 133-140.‏

Year	Class	Population	Percentage (%)
1997	City	4509	8.40
	Village	49,129	91.60
	Total	53,638	100.00
2011	City	6770	7.70
	Village	80,130	92.30
	Total	86,900	100.00
2021	City	19,980	17.90
	Village	91,524	82.10
	Total	111,504	100.00

Population	Village name
1813	AL Adel
3000	AL Arian
1350	Albu Ghraib
1750	Abu Gharb
2000	Abu Sraha
400	North Qazviniya
1500	Jbessa Wahhabi
500	Joban
750	Abu Dabaa
3000	Modern Village
1100	AL Obaid
1600	AL Moehy
1000	Zirfat
513	AL Eawadil
750	AL Fatlah
21,026	Total

Indicator	Data source	Data type	Means of data acquisition
Village population	Statistics Department	Governmental institution	Private interviews
Percentage of urban building materials used in village	Local community	Field visit	Questionnaire
Distance between village and health centers	Physical Planning Department	Governmental institution	Private interviews combined with the use of coordinates in GIS
Distance between village and main roads	Physical Planning Department	Governmental institution	Private interviews combined with the use of coordinates in GIS
Nature of economic activity	Local community	Field survey to the heads of families	Questionnaire
Distance between village and educational institutions	Elementary Education Department	Governmental institution	Private interviews combined with the use of coordinates in GIS
Distance between village and drinking water sources	Physical Planning Department	Governmental institution	Private interviews combined with the use of in GIS
Number of communication towers	Direct note and communication companies	Governmental institution	Direct note combined with the use of coordinates in GIS
Distance between village and urban administrative center	Department of Housing	Governmental institution	Private interviews combined with the use of coordinates in GIS

Village	Indicator									Coordinate
Village	VP	PUBM(%)	DVH (m)	DVM (m)	DVDW (m)	NEA	DVEI (m)	NCT	DVU (m)	Latitude (N)	Longitude (E)
AL Adel	1813	38.5	1526.2	15.0	67.9	4	923.7	1	8305.9	44.39°	32.15°
AL Arian	3000	72.6	2378.0	67.9	67.9	10	67.9	1	3722.9	44.45°	32.12°
Albu Ghraib	1350	92.9	1443.9	42.0	20.3	10	280.0	2	869.7	44.47°	32.06°
Abu Gharb	1750	71.4	1281.4	67.9	96.0	10	923.7	2	4768.6	44.43°	32.13°
Abu Sraha	2000	30.7	2038.6	829.0	303.7	7	1855.0	1	2704.7	44.48°	32.11°
North Qazviniya	400	58.3	151.9	67.9	192.1	4	70.0	1	9376.2	44.37°	32.15°
Jbessa Wahhabi	1500	58.9	2438.3	67.9	135.8	7	953.2	1	6308.8	44.47°	32.15°
Joban	500	22.9	151.9	96.0	135.8	4	480.2	-	9385.3	44.40°	32.16°
Abu Dabaa	750	55.7	1138.5	135.8	384.2	7	731.5	-	1358.3	44.47°	32.06°
Modern Village	3000	95.4	679.1	135.8	709.1	10	611.2	1	5700.4	44.47°	32.02°
AL Obaid	1100	41.4	1154.6	60.0	280.0	4	1944.8	1	203.7	44.44°	32.07°
AL Moehy	1600	57.6	820.6	28.0	67.9	4	759.3	1	6622.3	44.42°	32.15°
Zirfat	1000	40.0	530.4	530.4	67.9	4	1508.0	1	2307.1	44.48°	32.06°
AL Eawadil	513	46.7	1439.1	16.0	96.0	4	1138.5	-	5080.9	44.40°	32.12°
AL Fatlah	750	26.8	1632.8	25.0	67.9	10	1539.7	-	3620.6	44.50°	32.06°

Indicator	Preference	Percentage (%)
Village population	The closer to the densely populated villages, the greater the preference.	14.00
Percentage of urban building materials used in villages	The more urban building materials used in villages, the greater the preference.	13.00
Distance between village and health centers	The closer to the health centers, the greater the preference.	12.00
Distance between village and main roads	The closer to the main roads, the greater the preference.	12.00
Nature of economic activity	The more diversity the economic activity, the greater the preference.	12.00
Distance between village and education institutions	The closer to the educational institutions, the greater the preference.	10.00
Distance between village and drinking water sources	The closer to the drinking water sources, the greater the preference.	10.00
Number of communication towers	The higher the number of communication towers, the greater the preference.	9.00
Distance between village and urban administrative center	The closer to the urban administrative center, the greater the preference.	8.00