Cultivating historical heritage area vitality using urban morphology approach based on big data and machine learning

Jiayu Wu,Yutian Lu,Hei Gao,Mingshu Wang

doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2021.101716

Jiayu Wu, Yutian Lu + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2021.101716

Copy DOI

Abstract

The conservation of historical heritage can bring social benefits to cities by promoting community economic development and societal creativity. In the early stages of historical heritage conservation, the focus was on the museum-style concept for individual structures. At present, heritage area vitality is often adopted as a general conservation method to increase the vibrancy of such areas. However, it remains unclear whether urban morphological elements suitable for urban areas can be applied to heritage areas. This study uses ridge regression and LightGBM with multi-source big geospatial data to explore whether urban morphological elements that affect the vitality of heritage and urban areas are consistent or have different spatial distributions and daily variations. From a sample of 12 Chinese cities, our analysis shows the following results. First, factors affecting urban vitality differ from those influencing heritage areas. Second, factors influencing urban and heritage areas' vitality have diurnal variations and differ across cities. The overarching contribution of this study is to propose a quantitative and replicable framework for heritage adaptation, combining urban morphology and vitality measures derived from big geospatial data. This study also extends the understanding of forms of heritage areas and provides theoretical support for heritage conservation, urban construction, and economic development.

Highlights

In the 20th century, the conservation of historical heritage was a key topic in urban planning, as it is a widely recognized way to promote community economic development and societal creativity (Greffe, 2012; Tyler, Tyler, & Ligibel, 2018)
The co efficients of determination associated with daytime vitality (DV) and nighttime vitality (NV) are 0.703 and 0.875, respectively
The main research questions in this study are the differences in urban morphological elements affecting the vitality of urban areas and heri tage areas across cities

Summary

Introduction

In the 20th century, the conservation of historical heritage was a key topic in urban planning, as it is a widely recognized way to promote community economic development and societal creativity (Greffe, 2012; Tyler, Tyler, & Ligibel, 2018). Early conservation of historical heritage almost entirely focuses on individual structures, which are often buildings, monuments, and archaeological sites (Whitehand & Gu, 2010). As the concept shifted (Jokilehto, 1998), historical heritage conservation is no longer limited to individual structures and has expanded from single buildings to groups of buildings. Historical heritage conservation has undergone a paradigm shift from individuals to groups and areas (Ahmad, 2006; Glendinning, 2013). Heritage adaptation can bring multiple social benefits (Conejos, Lang ston, & Smith, 2011), adapt to the transformation of modern industrial cities (Plevoets & Sowinska-Heim, 2018), and expedite the development of surrounding communities (Bullen, 2007; Conejos, Langston, & Smith, 2013)

Results

Discussion

Conclusion