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

257 views

Published on

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

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
257
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

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

  1. 1. 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
  2. 2. 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
  3. 3. -
  4. 4. 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
  5. 5. -
  6. 6. -
  7. 7. 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
  8. 8. 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
  9. 9. 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
  10. 10. Geography of Indicators  Clusters of each type; good correlations between them La Trobe University 13
  11. 11. Relationships and Indicators  Clusters of each type; good correlations between them La Trobe University 14
  12. 12. Geography of Indicators: Inward Income >$1250/wk La Trobe University 15
  13. 13. Geography of Indicators: Inward Income <$300/wk La Trobe University 16
  14. 14. Geography of Indicators: Inward 55-74 years La Trobe University 17
  15. 15. Geography of Indicators: Density of Landscape La Trobe University 18
  16. 16. Geography of Indicators: Rail Node La Trobe University 19
  17. 17. 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
  18. 18. 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

×