Establishing Urban Revitalization and Regional Development Strategies with Consideration of Urban Stakeholders Based on the ISA-NRM Approach
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Research Framework
2.1. Infrastructure Construction (IC)
2.2. Living Environment (LE)
2.3. Trade and Investment (TI)
2.4. Urban Consciousness (UC)
3. Methodology
3.1. The Survey Subjects and Reliability Analysis
3.2. The ISA (Importance Satisfaction Analysis) Approach
3.3. The NRM Analysis Based on the DEMATEL Approach
- Evaluate the original average matrix
- 2.
- Calculate the direct influence matrix
- 3.
- Calculate the indirect influence matrix
- 4.
- Evaluate the full influence matrix
- 5.
- Determine the network relation map (NRM)
3.4. The ISA-NRM Approach
3.5. Evaluation the Suitable Acceptance Paths through the Rank of Aspects
3.6. Determine the Common Acceptance Paths Using the Aspects Rank for Diverse Stakeholders
4. The Analysis of the ISA-NRM Approach for Diverse Stakeholders
4.1. The Acceptance Strategy and Suitable Acceptance paths
- (1)
- The suitable acceptance paths for residents
- (2)
- The suitable acceptance paths for sojourners
- (3)
- The suitable acceptance paths for travelers
4.2. The Common Acceptance Paths
4.2.1. The Common Acceptance Paths for II (Importance Index)
4.2.2. The Common Acceptance Paths for SI (Satisfaction Index)
4.3. Discussion
4.3.1. Suitable Acceptance Paths
4.3.2. Common Acceptance Paths
- (1)
- The common acceptance path of II (importance index)
- (2)
- The common acceptance path of SI (satisfaction index)
4.3.3. Common Suitable Paths
- (1)
- The IC (infrastructure construction) aspect is in the fourth quadrant (high importance and low satisfaction) for internal stakeholders (residents and sojourners). The IC (infrastructure construction) aspect includes four criteria: transportation infrastructure, information infrastructure, public service construction, and recreational and exhibition construction. The LE (living environment) aspect is in the fourth quadrant (H, L) for external stakeholders (travelers). The LE (living environment) aspect includes the four criteria (natural landscape maintenance, ecological environment protection, maintenance of historical monuments, and religious, cultural heritage). Natural landscape maintenance can allow citizens to enjoy the original environmental and natural landscape, and the ecological environmental protection can foster a sustainable ecological environment. Maintaining historical monuments can let citizens understand the city’s history and urban development track. Preserving and promoting cultural festivals can enable citizens to learn about cultural context and local religious festivals.
- (2)
- In the II (importance index), the LE (living environment) aspect is more critical than the IC (infrastructure construction) aspect, and the IC aspect is also more important than the TI (trade and investment) aspect. Besides, the LE (living environment) aspect is more satisfied than the IC (infrastructure construction) aspect, and the IC aspect is also more satisfied than the TI (trade and investment) aspect in the SI (satisfaction index). Therefore, urban managers should understand that citizens care more about the living environment and infrastructure construction and pay more attention to infrastructure construction than trade and investment. So, urban managers should build the infrastructure construction and promote trade and investment and maintain the sustainable living environment.
- (3)
- Urban managers should pay attention to the balance of urban development and environmental sustainability. Some new urban revitalization plans may increase new infrastructure construction and attract more manufacturers to settle here. Still, too much new infrastructure construction and industrial investment may lead to a rise in the cost of living and housing. Residents may not enjoy urban revitalization benefits but instead may face resource competition and price inflation problems. Besides, some new infrastructure construction and industrial investment may need more natural resources (land, water, energy, etc.), so the residents’ living environment may change. With the lack of water, power, and labor, more and more farmlands may be turned into factories, and regional agriculture may decline.
- (4)
- With urban aging, essential infrastructure needs to renew to support urban development. The internal stakeholders (residents and sojourners) pay attention to the problem of urban aging and the renewal of essential infrastructure more than external stakeholders (travelers). Enhancing transportation infrastructure can improve the citizens’ daily commuting needs and promote local commerce activities. Improving information infrastructure also can satisfy citizens’ ICT (information and communication technology) service needs and attract more manufacturers to settle. Strengthening public service construction can provide citizens’ education, medical and social welfare needs, and promoting recreational and exhibition construction can increase cultural and recreation spaces for citizens.
- (5)
- Therefore, the external stakeholders (travelers) care about the issues for the living environment in urban revitalization. The external stakeholders (travelers) consider the living environment more critical for sustainable urban development. Hence, maintaining a natural landscape can let the citizens enjoy the original and natural landscape and protect the ecological environment. Keeping historical monuments can let citizens understand the city’s history and urban development track. Preserving and promoting cultural festivals can enable citizens to learn about cultural context and local religious festivals.
- (6)
- The two common suitable adoption paths [IC (infrastructure construction)→TI (trade and investment)→LE (living environment); IC (infrastructure construction)→TI (trade and investment)→UC (urban consciousness)→LE (living environment] were adopted to affect the urban revitalization and sustainable urban development for three urban stakeholders. The IC (infrastructure construction) aspect influences the TI (trade and investment) aspect, and the TI aspect affects the LE (living environment) aspect based on the third common suitable path. The urban managers can strengthen the urban infrastructure construction (transportation infrastructure, information infrastructure, public service construction, and recreational and exhibition construction) to attract new trade and investment activities. Besides, relevant authorities can improve the living environment (natural landscape maintenance, ecological environment protection, historical monuments maintenance, and religious cultural heritage) for urban stakeholders through public and private department’ policy and financial support. The IC (infrastructure construction) aspect affects the TI (trade and investment) aspect, the TI (trade and investment) aspect affects the UC (urban consciousness) aspect, and the UC aspect influences the LE (living environment) aspect based on the fourth common-suitable path. Urban managers can promote business and trade development through improving the basic infrastructure construction and strengthening the urban stakeholders’ urban consciousness. Then, the urban stakeholders also ensure regional sustainable development through their urban consciousness.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1. Conclusions
5.2. Academic Contributions
5.3. Future Studies
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jokinen, A.; Leino, H.; Backlund, P.; Laine, M. Strategic planning harnessing urban policy mobilities: The gradual development of local sustainability fix. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2018, 20, 551–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gotovac, A.S.; Kerbler, B. From Post-Socialist to Sustainable: The City of Ljubljana. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, M.C.; Hsu, C.L.; Chen, M.M. How Transportation Service Quality Drives Public Attitude and Image of a Sustainable City: Satisfaction as A Mediator and Involvement as A Moderator. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Szmelter-Jarosz, A.; Rzesny-Cieplinska, J. Priorities of Urban Transport System Stakeholders According to Crowd Logistics Solutions in City Areas. A Sustainability Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Strulak-Wojcikiewicz, R.; Wagner, N. Exploring opportunities of using the sharing economy in sustainable urban freight transport. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 68, 102778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riechers, M.; Barkmann, J.; Tscharntke, T. Diverging perceptions by social groups on cultural ecosystem services provided by urban green. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2018, 175, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ko, Y.D.; Song, B.D. Sustainable service design and revenue management for electric tour bus systems: Seoul city tour bus service and the eco-mileage program. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019, 27, 308–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vijayan, V.P.; Paul, B.; Chooralil, V.S. Energy Efficient Sustainable City Monitoring Using IoT Enabled Wireless Sensor Networks and Data Analytics. J. Inf. Sci. Eng. 2021, 37, 413–423. [Google Scholar]
- Machado, C.; Ribeiro, D.; Pereira, R.D.; Bazanini, R. Do Brazilian cities want to become smart or sustainable? J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 199, 214–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huovila, A.; Bosch, P.; Airaksinen, M. Comparative analysis of standardized indicators for Smart sustainable cities: What indicators and standards to use and when? Cities 2019, 89, 141–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacharya, T.R.; Bhattacharya, A.; McLellan, B.; Tezuka, T. Sustainable smart city development framework for developing countries. Urban Res. Pract. 2020, 13, 180–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Kwon, Y.; Kim, D. Regional Smart City Development Focus: The South Korean National Strategic Smart City Program. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 7193–7210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ratajczyk, N.; Wagner, I.; Wolanska-Kaminska, A.; Jurczak, T.; Zalewski, M. University’s multi-scale initiatives for redefining city development. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2017, 18, 50–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, P.; Lee, M.H. Developing Sustainable City Indicators for Cambodia through Delphi Processes of Panel Surveys. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bouzguenda, I.; Alalouch, C.; Fava, N. Examining digital participatory planning: Maturity assessment in a Small Dutch city. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 264, 121706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yigitcanlar, T.; Kankanamge, N.; Vella, K. How Are Smart City Concepts and Technologies Perceived and Utilized? A Systematic Geo-Twitter Analysis of Smart Cities in Australia. J. Urban Technol. 2021, 28, 135–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hori, S.; Shimizu, Y. Designing methods of human interface for supervisory control systems. Control Eng. Pract. 1999, 7, 1413–1419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seyed-Hosseini, S.M.; Safaei, N.; Asgharpour, M.J. Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2006, 91, 872–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liou, J.J.H.; Yen, L.; Tzeng, G.H. Building an effective safety management system for airlines. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2008, 14, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Tzeng, G.H. A value-created system of science (technology) park by using DEMATEL. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 9683–9697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.W.; Tzeng, G.H. Identification of a threshold value for the DEMATEL method using the maximum mean de-entropy algorithm to find critical services provided by a semiconductor intellectual property mall. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 9891–9898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Hsieh, M.S.; Tzeng, G.H. Evaluating vehicle telematics system by using a novel MCDM techniques with dependence and feedback. Expert Syst. Appl. 2010, 37, 6723–6736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. A novel hybrid decision-making model for determining product position under consideration of dependence and feedback. Appl. Math. Model. 2015, 39, 2194–2216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Shih, Y.H.; Tzeng, G.H.; Yu, H.C. A service selection model for digital music service platforms using a hybrid MCDM approach. Appl. Soft Comput. 2016, 48, 385–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luthra, S.; Govindan, K.; Mangla, S.K. Structural model for sustainable consumption and production adoption-A grey-DEMATEL based approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 125, 198–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathiyazhagan, K.; Sengupta, S.; Poovazhagan, L. A decision making trial and evaluation laboratory approach to analyse the challenges to environmentally sustainable manufacturing in Indian automobile industry. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2018, 16, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Kuo, C.L. A service position model of package tour services based on the hybrid MCDM approach. Curr. Issues Tour. 2019, 22, 2478–2510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. The analysis of sustainable development strategies for industrial tourism based on IOA-NRM approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. Establishing environment sustentation strategies for urban and rural/town tourism based on a hybrid MCDM approach. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 2360–2395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Chang, K.C. Establishing the service evaluation and selection system for emerging culture festival events using the hybrid MCDM technique. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 2240–2272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tseng, M.L.; Ardaniah, V.; Sujanto, R.Y.; Fujii, M.; Lim, M.K. Multicriteria assessment of renewable energy sources under uncertainty: Barriers to adoption. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 171, 120937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. Evaluating the urban sustainable development strategies and common suited paths considering various stakeholders. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chai, Q.; Li, H.M.; Tian, W.; Zhang, Y. Critical Success Factors for Safety Program Implementation of Regeneration of Abandoned Industrial Building Projects in China: A Fuzzy DEMATEL Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Aspects/Criteria | Descriptions |
---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | |
Transportation infrastructure (IC1) | Convenient transportation infrastructure can satisfy citizens’ daily commuting needs and promote local commerce activities. |
Information infrastructure (IC2) | Excellent information infrastructure can provide citizens with diverse information service needs and attract more manufacturers to settle in the region. |
Public service construction (IC3) | Complete education, medical, and social welfare can satisfy citizens’ public service needs in their daily life. |
Recreational and exhibition construction (IC4) | Diverse cultural and recreation spaces can meet the citizen’s need to watch and perform outdoor sports and recreational activities. |
Living environment (LE) | |
Natural landscape maintenance (LE1) | Urban natural landscape maintenance can ensure that citizens enjoy the original natural and ecological landscape. |
Ecological environment protection (LE2) | The ecological environment protection can let urban citizens own a sustainable ecological environment. |
Maintenance of historical monuments (LE3) | Complete maintenance of historical monuments can allow citizens to understand the city’s history and urban development track. |
Religious cultural heritage (LE4) | Preservation and promotion of cultural festivals can enable citizens to learn about local religious festivals and cultural contexts. |
Trade and investment (TI) | |
Industrial operation activities (TI1) | Primary industries and industrial production activities can drive local employment and promote the formation of local industrial settlements. |
Economic and trade activities (TI2) | Services and business activities can activate local consumption, help attract foreign investment, and promote the formation of business circles. |
Industry investment incentives (TI3) | Complete municipal infrastructure and employment and migrant policies can attract manufacturers and workers to settle in and promote local economic development. |
Employment opportunities (TI4) | Appropriate investment incentives and preferential tax policies can attract foreign manufacturers to settle and drive local employment opportunities. |
Urban consciousness (UC) | |
Cultural celebration (UC1) | The inheritance and promotion of festival events will enable citizens to better understand local folk events and emerging festivals. |
Multicultural integration (UC2) | The citizens’ diversity can strengthen the local cultural integration and enrich the local culture connotation. |
Sporting events organized (UC3) | Various sports events can activate urban tourism and promote the citizens’ leisure sports and recreational atmosphere. |
Local cultural promotion (UC4) | Promoting local cultural characteristics can improve the citizens’ identity and promote the local tourism industrial development. |
Items | Alpha | Result |
---|---|---|
Importance index | 0.988 | High |
Satisfaction index | 0.985 | High |
Aspects of evaluation system | 0.937 | High |
Importance Index | Satisfaction Index | (II, SI) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aspects | MI | SI | MS | SS | MI |
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 6.913 | 0.362 | 5.413 | −0.386 | (H, L) |
Living environment (LE) | 7.089 | 1.044 | 5.627 | 0.926 | (H, H) |
Trade and investment (TI) | 6.477 | −1.332 | 5.275 | −1.231 | (L, L) |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 6.801 | −0.074 | 5.589 | 0.692 | (L, H) |
Average | 6.820 | 0.000 | 5.476 | 0.000 | |
Standard deviation | 0.258 | 1.000 | 0.163 | 1.000 | |
Maximum | 7.089 | 1.044 | 5.627 | 0.926 | |
Minimum | 6.477 | −1.332 | 5.275 | −1.231 |
Aspects | IC | LE | TI | UC | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.000 | 3.000 | 2.703 | 2.729 | 8.432 |
Living environment (LE) | 2.881 | 0.000 | 2.644 | 2.847 | 8.373 |
Trade and investment (TI) | 2.822 | 2.669 | 0.000 | 2.508 | 8.000 |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 2.653 | 2.788 | 2.593 | 0.000 | 8.034 |
Total | 8.356 | 8.458 | 7.941 | 8.085 | - |
Aspects | IC | LE | TI | UC | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.000 | 0.355 | 0.320 | 0.323 | 0.997 |
Living environment (LE) | 0.341 | 0.000 | 0.313 | 0.337 | 0.990 |
Trade and investment (TI) | 0.334 | 0.316 | 0.000 | 0.297 | 0.946 |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 0.314 | 0.330 | 0.307 | 0.000 | 0.950 |
Total | 0.988 | 1.000 | 0.939 | 0.956 | - |
Aspects | Sum of Row | Sum of Column | Sum of Row and Column | Importance of Influence |
---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.997 | 0.988 | 1.985 | 2 |
Living environment (LE) | 0.990 | 1.000 | 1.990 | 1 |
Trade and investment (TI) | 0.946 | 0.939 | 1.885 | 4 |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 0.950 | 0.956 | 1.906 | 3 |
Aspects | IC | LE | TI | UC | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 8.834 | 8.824 | 8.422 | 8.543 | 34.622 |
Living environment (LE) | 8.698 | 8.868 | 8.378 | 8.489 | 34.433 |
Trade and investment (TI) | 8.407 | 8.495 | 8.169 | 8.219 | 33.289 |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 8.440 | 8.513 | 8.121 | 8.311 | 33.385 |
Total | 34.379 | 34.700 | 33.089 | 33.562 | - |
Aspects | IC | LE | TI | UC | d |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 8.834 | 9.179 | 8.742 | 8.866 | 35.620 |
Living environment (LE) | 9.039 | 8.868 | 8.691 | 8.826 | 35.424 |
Trade and investment (TI) | 8.741 | 8.811 | 8.169 | 8.516 | 34.236 |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 8.754 | 8.843 | 8.428 | 8.311 | 34.336 |
r | 35.368 | 35.701 | 34.029 | 34.519 | - |
Aspects | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 35.620 | 35.368 | 70.987 | 0.252 |
Living environment (LE) | 35.424 | 35.701 | 71.125 | −0.276 |
Trade and investment (TI) | 34.236 | 34.029 | 68.265 | 0.207 |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 34.336 | 34.519 | 68.855 | −0.183 |
Aspects | IC | LE | TI | UC |
---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure construction (IC) | - | |||
Living environment (LE) | −0.140 | - | ||
Trade and investment (TI) | −0.001 | 0.120 | - | |
Urban consciousness (UC) | −0.112 | 0.017 | −0.088 | - |
Aspects | ISA | NRM | Strategy | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
II | SI | (II, AI) | d + r | d − r | (R, D) | ||
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.362 | −0.386 | H, L | 70.987 | 0.252 | D (+, +) | D |
Living environment (LE) | 1.044 | 0.926 | H, H | 71.125 | −0.276 | ID (+, −) | A |
Trade and investment (TI) | −1.332 | −1.231 | L, L | 68.265 | 0.207 | D (+, +) | C |
Urban consciousness (UC) | −0.074 | 0.692 | L, H | 68.855 | −0.183 | ID (+, −) | B |
II (Importance Index) | SI (Satisfaction Index) | |
---|---|---|
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Suitable acceptance paths | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
II (Importance Index) | SI (Satisfaction Index) | |
---|---|---|
Residents | ||
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Sojourners | ||
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Common paths | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Aspects | ISA | NRM | Strategy | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
II | SI | (II, SI) | d + r | d − r | (R, D) | ||
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.541 | −0.789 | H, L | 70.987 | 0.252 | D (+, +) | D |
Living environment (LE) | 1.001 | 1.176 | H, H | 71.125 | −0.276 | ID (+, −) | A |
Trade and investment (TI) | −1.279 | −0.872 | L, L | 68.265 | 0.207 | D (+, +) | C |
Urban consciousness (UC) | −0.262 | 0.484 | L, H | 68.855 | −0.183 | ID (+, −) | B |
II (Importance Index) | SI (Satisfaction Index) | |
---|---|---|
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Suitable acceptance paths | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Aspects | ISA | NRM | Strategy | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
II | SI | (II, SI) | d + r | d − r | (R, D) | ||
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.178 | −0.034 | H, L | 70.987 | 0.252 | D (+, +) | D |
Living environment (LE) | 1.093 | 0.911 | H, H | 71.125 | −0.276 | ID (+, −) | A |
Trade and investment (TI) | −1.330 | −1.383 | L, L | 68.265 | 0.207 | D (+, +) | C |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 0.059 | 0.506 | H, H | 68.855 | −0.183 | ID (+, −) | A |
II (Importance Index) | SI (Satisfaction Index) | |
---|---|---|
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Suitable acceptance paths | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Aspects | ISA | ISA | Strategy | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
II | SI | (II, SI) | d + r | d − r | (R, D) | ||
Infrastructure construction (IC) | 0.129 | 0.000 | H, H | 70.987 | 0.252 | D (+, +) | A |
Living environment (LE) | 0.387 | −0.405 | H, L | 71.125 | −0.276 | ID (+, −) | D |
Trade and investment (TI) | −1.420 | −0.971 | L, L | 68.265 | 0.207 | D (+, +) | C |
Urban consciousness (UC) | 0.904 | 1.376 | H, H | 68.855 | −0.183 | ID (+, −) | A |
II (Importance Index) | SI (Satisfaction Index) | |
---|---|---|
Rank | UC[1] > LE[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] | UC[1] > IC[2] > LE[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[3]→LE[2] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[1]→LE[2] {Y} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[2] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[1]→LE[2] {Y} | 1. IC[2]→LE[3] {Y} 2. IC[2]→UC[1]→LE[3] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[3] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[1]→LE[3] {Y} |
Suitable acceptance paths | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
II (Importance Index) | |
---|---|
Residents | |
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} |
Sojourners | |
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1] {Y} |
Travelers | |
Rank | UC[1] > LE[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[3]→LE[2] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[1]→LE[2] {Y} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[2] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[1]→LE[2] {Y} |
Common acceptance paths | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
SI (Satisfaction Index) | |
---|---|
Residents | |
Rank | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Sojourners | |
Rank | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[3]→LE[1] {N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1] {N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1] {Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1] {Y} |
Travelers | |
Rank | UC[1] > IC[2] > LE[3] > TI[4] |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[3] {Y} 2. IC[2]→UC[1]→LE[3] {Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[3] {Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[1]→LE[3] {Y} |
Common acceptance paths | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Acceptance Strategy | Acceptance Strategy A (Continue Keeping) | Acceptance Strategy B (Status Monitoring) | Acceptance Strategy C (Progressive Development) | Acceptance Strategy D (Immediate Development) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholders | |||||
Improvement priority | Step 3 | Step 4 | Step 2 | Step 1 | |
Residents | Living environment (LE) | Urban consciousness (UC) | Trade and investment (TI) | Infrastructure construction (IC) | |
Suitable acceptance paths | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE | ||||
Sojourners | Living environment (LE) Urban consciousness (UC) | Trade and investment (TI) | Infrastructure construction (IC) | ||
Suitable acceptance paths | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE | ||||
Travelers | Infrastructure construction (IC) Urban consciousness (UC) | Trade and investment (TI) | Living environment (LE) | ||
Suitable acceptance paths | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
II (Importance Index) | SI (Satisfaction Index) | Suitable Paths | |
---|---|---|---|
Internal stakeholders- Residents | |||
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] | |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1]{N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1]{Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1]{Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1]{Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1]{N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1]{N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1]{Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1]{Y} | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Internal stakeholders- Sojourners | |||
Rank | LE[1] > IC[2] > UC[3] > TI[4] | LE[1] > UC[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] | |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[2]→LE[1]{N} 2. IC[2]→UC[3]→LE[1]{Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[1]{Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[3]→LE[1]{Y} | 1. IC[3]→LE[1]{N} 2. IC[3]→UC[2]→LE[1]{N} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[1]{Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[2]→LE[1]{Y} | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Common paths (Residents and Sojourners) | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
External stakeholders- Travelers | |||
Rank | UC[1] > LE[2] > IC[3] > TI[4] | UC[1] > IC[2] > LE[3] > TI[4] | |
Acceptance paths | 1. IC[3]→LE[2]{N} 2. IC[3]→UC[1]→LE[2]{Y} 3. IC[3]→TI[4]→LE[2]{Y} 4. IC[3]→TI[4]→UC[1]→LE[2]{Y} | 1. IC[2]→LE[3]{Y} 2. IC[2]→UC[1]→LE[3]{Y} 3. IC[2]→TI[4]→LE[3]{Y} 4. IC[2]→TI[4]→UC[1]→LE[3]{Y} | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Common paths (Residents, Sojourners and Travelers) | 2. IC→UC→LE 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE | 3. IC→TI→LE 4. IC→TI→UC→LE |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chang, J.-J.; Lin, C.-L. Establishing Urban Revitalization and Regional Development Strategies with Consideration of Urban Stakeholders Based on the ISA-NRM Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127230
Chang J-J, Lin C-L. Establishing Urban Revitalization and Regional Development Strategies with Consideration of Urban Stakeholders Based on the ISA-NRM Approach. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127230
Chicago/Turabian StyleChang, Jung-Jung, and Chia-Li Lin. 2022. "Establishing Urban Revitalization and Regional Development Strategies with Consideration of Urban Stakeholders Based on the ISA-NRM Approach" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127230