• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Butt_A_Fish_B_Amenity, landscape and forms of peri-urbanisation around Melbourne, Australia
 

Butt_A_Fish_B_Amenity, landscape and forms of peri-urbanisation around Melbourne, Australia

on

  • 103 views

Beyond the Edge: La Trobe's First National Peri-Urban Conference

Beyond the Edge: La Trobe's First National Peri-Urban Conference
La Trobe University
Oct 2013

Statistics

Views

Total Views
103
Views on SlideShare
103
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Butt_A_Fish_B_Amenity, landscape and forms of peri-urbanisation around Melbourne, Australia Butt_A_Fish_B_Amenity, landscape and forms of peri-urbanisation around Melbourne, Australia Presentation Transcript

    • Amenity, landscape and forms of periurbanisation around Melbourne, Australia Andrew Butt (La Trobe University) Bill Fish (Spatial Vision Innovation Pty Ltd) Beyond the Edge 2013 – La Trobe University, Melbourne
    • Peri-urbanization? Counter-urbanization? Multifunctional landscapes?  A broad conception of a region: ̶ Areas directly ‘urbanising’ ̶ Areas influenced by urban-generated land markets ̶ Areas influenced by various modes of ‘counterurbanization’ ̶ Amenity, accessibility, affordability – an interplay of factors Peri-urban Conference October 2013 2
    • -
    • Socio-economic processes are varied…  A series of processes emerge from the literature and empirical work, including: ̶ Exurbanisation: higher cost land markets, purchasing an accessible rural lifestyle ̶ ‘Displaced’ suburbia – suburban growth performed beyond the fringe ̶ Retiree mobility – at varied income levels ̶ ‘Welfare-led’ migration, especially in the high-cost Australian metropolitan housing markets  These overlap socially and spatially La Trobe University 5
    • -
    • -
    • Our approach  Considering a geography of these processes of change in a geographically wide ‘peri-urban’ field  Using a set of proxy indicators to test change – based on inward migration 2006-2011  Considering the relationship between these, and relationships with a set of location factors of ‘attraction’  Testing indicators and concepts – are they fit for purpose? La Trobe University 10
    • The data sources  Census 2011: ̶ usual residence 2011 for those with a different SA2 address in 2006 ̶ Cross-tabulated with selected socio-economic categories (age, income, occupation)  Location database (GIS): ̶ Developed from a lot/property-based attractiveness index of development ‘pressure’ ̶ Average scores (indexed) aggregated for all within each SA2 La Trobe University 11
    • The indicators  high income  ‘professional’ occupations  average proximity to main roads  low income  …proximity to rail nodes  unemployed  …proximity and density of native ‘woody’ vegetation  age 55-74  not in labour force  age under 15 years  …proximity and density of ‘landscape’ features (SLO, ESO, Parks)  ‘driver/labourer/machinery operator’ occupations La Trobe University 12
    • Geography of Indicators  Clusters of each type; good correlations between them La Trobe University 13
    • Relationships and Indicators  Clusters of each type; good correlations between them La Trobe University 14
    • Geography of Indicators: Inward Income >$1250/wk La Trobe University 15
    • Geography of Indicators: Inward Income <$300/wk La Trobe University 16
    • Geography of Indicators: Inward 55-74 years La Trobe University 17
    • Geography of Indicators: Density of Landscape La Trobe University 18
    • Geography of Indicators: Rail Node La Trobe University 19
    • Location and socio-economic change  Regression models: location factors as dependent, all models show significance, but.. ̶ Some variables (professionals, higher income, children/families) show better influence than others ̶ Professionals – landscape ̶ Higher income/u15 – non-vegetated regions ̶ Lower income and rail, retiree and non-rail La Trobe University 20
    • The limits to attractiveness • Issues in understanding aggregate ‘attractiveness’ factors • Complexity and inter-connections of social and economic processes • New in-migrants and relationships to extant populations • Relationships between peri-urbanization, counter-urbanization and the formation of multi-functional landscapes 21