Explaining the Spatial Norm Model with the Aim of Promoting Sustainable Behavior in Residential Complexes Based on Space Syntax Theory(Case Study: Shiraz)

Subject Areas : Sociology and Human Settlements

Marziyeh Shahroudi Kolour ¹ , Khosro Movahed ² , Hojjatollah Rashid kolvir ³ , Malihe Taghipour ⁴

1 - Ph.D. Candidate in Architecture, Department of Architecture, Khalkhal Branch, Islamic Azad University, Khalkhal, Iran
2 - Associate Professor of Architecture, The University of the District of Columbia, Department of Architecture and Urban Sustainability, Washington DC, USA
3 - Associate Professor of Architecture, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Mohaghegh Ardabili University, Ardabil, Iran
4 - Assistance Professor of Architecture, Department of Architecture, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

Received: 2022-02-10 Accepted : 2023-07-27 Published : 2024-05-21

Keywords: Housing, Space Syntax, Spatial Behavior, Sustainable Behavior, Spatial Norm,

Abstract :

Introduction: Due to the importance of individuals' behavior in achieving the goals of sustainability, behavioral models have somehow tried to identify components that predict sustainable behavior. Despite numerous studies that have studied spatial behaviors and structures, so far no research has been done on the effect of spatial behavior on sustainable behavior. Research Aim: The present study investigates the effect of spatial behavior on sustainable behavior by adding this factor to the components of the planned behavior model (motivation, attitude, norm, and perceived behavioral control). Methodology: 516 researcher-made questionnaires were distributed that were approved by researchers in the field of behavior and psychology. How this affected was required to examine spatial structures and their characteristics. For this reason, the structural and syntactic patterns of the citizens' housing were also examined. Structural equation model, analysis of variance test, and syntactic tests for calculating the index of visibility, integration, depth, and spatial value have been the analytical tools of this research. Studied Areas: The city of Shiraz and its 11 districts constitute the study area of the research. Results: Spatial behavior has a positive and interactive relationship with all factors of planned behavior and among them, it has had the greatest impact on usual behavior and norms. F test showed that there is a significant difference between spatial behavior and sustainable behavior of individuals in both central and axial patterns. This difference was due to the spatial value of the different territories and the environmental and spatial facilities they provide to their inhabitants. The central pattern exposes the public realm to greater use with greater integrity and visibility, and the axial model places more importance on the private realm and encourages privacy. Conclusion: The result of the research is the spatial norm model named according to the impact of usability and the fields of visibility and mean depth of each space that control the communication and interactions between members of a small community such as family.

References:

زیاری، کرامت الله؛ فرهادی‏خواه، حسین و آروین، محمود. (1395). سنجش پایداری اجتماعی محله‏ای (مطالعه موردی: محله سنگلج و ضرابخانه شهر تهران). فصلنامه مطالعات برنامه¬ریزی سکونتگاه¬های انسانی، 11(36)، 18-1.
شریعتی، سارا؛ خاک‏زند، مهدی و البرزی، فریبا. (1400). بررسی خلوت قرارگاه‏های رفتاری در سکونت‏گاه‏های دانشجویی شهر قزوین بر اساس همساختی (رفتار-کالبد) (مطالعه موردی: سکونت‏گاه‏های دانشجویی لاله و نرگس دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی قزوین). فصلنامه مطالعات برنامه¬ریزی سکونتگاه¬های انسانی، 16(2)، 438-419. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.25385968.1400.16.2.11.6
عبداللهی، مهدی؛ پورمحمودی، محمدرضا و قربانی، رسول. (1396). مدل‏یابی چشم‏انداز تغییر عادت‏های رفتاری کاربران وسایط نقلیه شخصی در استفاده از حمل‏ونقل عمومی (مطالعه موردی: کلان‏شهر تبریز). فصلنامه مطالعات برنامه¬ریزی سکونتگاه¬های انسانی، 12(3)، 500-481.
Ajzen, I. (1988). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behaviour. In: J. Kuhl and Beckmann (Eds.). Action Control: From cognition to behaviour. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 11-39.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t.
Arbuthnott, K. D. (2009). Education for sustainable development beyond attitude change. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. 10(2), 152-163. https://doi.org/10.1108/1467 637 0910945954.
Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of environmental psychology, 27(1), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002.
Bamberg, S., Rees, J., & Seebauer, S. (2015). Collective climate action: Determinants of participation intention in community-based pro-environmental initiatives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 155-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.006.
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P., & Bonnes, M. (2008). Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of environmental psychology, 28(1), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.09.003.
Chakraborty, A., Singh, M. P., & Roy, M. (2017). A study of goal frames shaping pro-environmental behaviour in university students. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 18(7), 1291–1310. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-10-2016-0185.
Cheng, T., Woon, D. K., & Lynes, J. K. (2011). The use of message framing in the promotion of environmentally sustainable behaviors. Social Marketing Quarterly, 17(2), 48-62. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15245004.2011.570859.
Corraliza, J. A., & Berenguer, J. (2000). Environmental values, beliefs, and actions: A situational approach. Environment and behavior, 32(6), 832-848. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972829.
Du, X., Bokel, R., & van den Dobbelsteen, A. (2019). Spatial configuration, building microclimate and thermal comfort: A modern house case. Energy and Buildings, 193, 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.03.038.
Eon, C., Morrison, G. M., & Byrne, J. (2018). The influence of design and everyday practices on individual heating and cooling behaviour in residential homes. Energy Efficiency, 11(2), 273-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002.
Ericson, J. D., Chrastil, E. R., & Warren, W. H. (2021). Space syntax visibility graph analysis is not robust to changes in spatial and temporal resolution. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 48(6), 1478-1494. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808319897624.
Figueroa-García, E. C., García-Machado, J. J., & Pérez-Bustamante Yábar, D. C. (2018). Modeling the social factors that determine sustainable consumption behavior in the community of Madrid. Sustainability, 10(8), 2811. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082811.
Guagnano, G. A., Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1995). Influences on attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environment and behavior, 27(5), 699-718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916595275005.
Han, H. (2014). The norm activation model and theory-broadening: Individuals' decision-making on environmentally-responsible convention attendance. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 462-471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.10.006.
Hanson, J., & Hillier, B. (1987). The architecture of community: Some new proposals on the social consequences of architectural and planning decisions. Architecture et Comportement/Architecture and Behaviour, 3(3), 251-273. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/5265.
Harth, N. S., Leach, C. W., & Kessler, T. (2013). Guilt, anger, and pride about in-group environmental behaviour: Different emotions predict distinct intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.12.005.
Hillier, B. (1996). Space Is the Machine: a Configurational Theory of Architecture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hillier, B. (2008). Space and spatiality: what the built environment needs from social theory. Building Research & Information, 36(3), 216-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210801928073.
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hillier, B., & Penn, A. (1991). Visible colleges: structure and randomness in the place of discovery. Science in context, 4(1), 23-50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889700000144.
Hunecke, M., Blöbaum, A., Matthies, E., & Höger, R. (2001). Responsibility and environment: Ecological norm orientation and external factors in the domain of travel mode choice behavior. Environment and behavior, 33(6), 830-852. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160121973269.
Klöckner, C. A., & Matthies, E. (2004). How habits interfere with norm-directed behaviour: A normative decision-making model for travel mode choice. Journal of environmental psychology, 24(3), 319-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.08.004.
Lindenberg, S., & Steg, L. (2007). Normative, gain and hedonic goal frames guiding environmental behavior. Journal of Social issues, 63(1), 117-137. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00499.x.
Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and social psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292181001.
Mahmoud, A. H., & Omar, R. H. (2015). Planting design for urban parks: Space syntax as a landscape design assessment tool. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 4(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.foar.2014.09.001.
Manning, C. (2009). The psychology of sustainable behavior: Tips for empowering people to take environmentally positive action. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
Mustafa, F. A., & Rafeeq, D. A. (2019). Assessment of elementary school buildings in Erbil city using space syntax analysis and school teachers′ feedback. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 58(3), 1039-1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2019.09.007.
O¨ lander, F., & ThØgersen, J. (1995). Understanding of consumer behaviour as a prerequisite for environmental protection. Journal of consumer policy, 18(4), 345-385. https://doi.org /10.1007/BF01024160.
Onwezen, M. C., Antonides, G., & Bartels, J. (2013). The Norm Activation Model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of economic psychology, 39, 141-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.07.005.
Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J., & Bengtsson, M. (2018). Consumer motivations for sustainable consumption: The interaction of gain, normative and hedonic motivations on electric vehicle adoption. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1272-1283. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2074.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. Advances in experimental social psychology, 10(1), 221-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5.
Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of environmental psychology, 29(3), 309-317. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004.
Stern, P. C. (1999). Information, incentives, and proenvironmental consumer behavior. Journal of consumer Policy, 22(4), 461-478. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006211709570.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. College of the Environment on the Peninsulas Publications, Human ecology review, 6(2), 81-97. https://cedar.wwu.edu/hcop_facpubs/1.
Tapia-Fonllem, C., Corral-Verdugo, V., Fraijo-Sing, B., & Durón-Ramos, M. F. (2013). Assessing sustainable behavior and its correlates: A measure of pro-ecological, frugal, altruistic and equitable actions. Sustainability, 5(2), 711-723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5020711.
Thøgersen, J. (2005). How may consumer policy empower consumers for sustainable lifestyles?. Journal of consumer policy, 28(2), 143-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-005-2982-8.
Thøgersen, J. (2006). Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: An extended taxonomy. Journal of environmental Psychology, 26(4), 247-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.09.004.
Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal Behavior. Brooks. Cole, Monterey.
Uzzell, D., Pol, E., & Badenas, D. (2002). Place identification, social cohesion, and enviornmental sustainability. Environment and behavior, 34(1), 26-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139165020 34001003.
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2013). The value of environmental self-identity: The relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 55-63. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jenvp.2012.12.006.
Van Raaij, W. F. (2002). Stages of behavioural change: motivation, ability and opportunity. In Marketing for Sustainability. TowardsTransactional Policy-Making (pp. 321-333). IOS Press.
Wai, Y. S., & Bojei, J. (2015). Proposed conceptual framework on cohesive effect of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on sustainable behaviours. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, No. 172, pp. 449-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.378.
Zerouati, W., & Bellal, T. (2020). Evaluating the impact of mass housings' in-between spaces' spatial configuration on users' social interaction. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 9(1), 34-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.05.005.