Enhancing the Benchmark Indicators Application Methodology of Integrated Assessment of the Built-Up Areas

Introduction. The sustainable development of the territories depends directly on the sustainability of the economic, social, urban and environmental subsystems. The aim of the work is to enhance the system of generalised benchmark indicators of integrated assessment designated to conduct the analysis of the current state of the urbanised territories, to assess their socio-ecological and economic capacity and to forecast their development. The scientific background for the study is formed by the works and research of E.G. Aksenova and E.P. Sokolova. However, many issues arising in the frame of implementation of the landscape formation, construction and engineering infrastructure development programmes are still poorly explored and thus determine the relevance of the research on this topic.

Materials and Methods. Studying the methodology of integrated assessment of the urbanised territories became an object of this research. Currently, there exists quite many methods and technologies for conducting the socio-ecological and economic assessment of the built-up areas. An integrated approach and empirical research methods made it possible to deepen and expand the frames of the currently available studies in this field, supplement them with the benchmark indicators of integrated assessment of the territories, distinguish the main directions of such assessment, identify assessment zones, develop and propose assessment criteria.

Results. The proposed benchmark indicators for assessing the territory enable conducting a complex analysis of the state of the urbanised landscapes, which results in development of the proposals and targeted programmes on their rational use. The materials of the suggested integrated assessment of the territory can foster implementation of the design solutions on the municipal entity layout; identify the divergence between the existing infrastructure and the territory layout; forecast further development of the territories and determine the priority directions for their development; identify inconsistencies in the system of planning and forecasting the built-up areas development; define the levels of anthropogenic and technogenic load on the environment; work out the programmes and activities for development of the territories having the potential to become the growing points.

Discussion and Conclusion. The materials of the integrated assessment of the territory are the basis for the long-term forecasting and determining the perspectives of development of all spheres of urban landscapes activities. The scientific results obtained in the frame of the conducted research are the elements of knowledge which have a different degree of scientific significance. The theoretical significance lies in the development of the methodology of forming the main criteria for assessing the urban territories. The practical significance lies in the development of the recommendations for the rational use and layout of the urbanised territories based on the presented assessment methodology.

1. Shevchenko OYu, Aksenova EG, Tkachenko AS. Vliyanie Razvitiya i Razmeshcheniya Proizvoditel'nykh Sil na Sostoyanie Okruzhayushchei Prirodnoi Sredy. Economy and Ecology of Territorial Formations. 2016(2):86–90. (In Russ.). URL: http://eco.e.donstu.ru/upload/iblock/9aa/st_16.pdf (accessed: 24.06.2023).

2. Ovchinnikova N, Burdova D, Garanova M. Arrangement for Rational Use and Conservation of Land Resources in Rostov Region. Topical Problems of Green Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering 2019 (TPACEE 2019). 2020;164:07005. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016407005

3. Wójcik-Leńa J, SobolewskaMikulska K, Sajnóg N, Leń P. The Idea of Rational Management of Problematic Agricultural Areas in the Course of Land Consolidation. Land Use Policy. 2018;78:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.06.044

4. Lengoiboni M, Richter C, Zevenbergen J. Cross-Cutting Challenges to Innovation in Land Tenure Documentation. Land Use Policy. 2019;85:21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.023

5. Han W, Zhang X, Zheng X. Land Use Regulation and Urban Land Value: Evidence From China. Land Use Policy. 2020;92:104432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104432

6. Ovchinnikova N, Batranyuk M, Zhidkova E, Lazebnaya Y, Timofeeva V. Main Areas of Land Use in Municipal Entity. Innovative Technologies in Science and Education (ITSE-2020). 2020;210:09004. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202021009004

7. Aksenova EG, Aksenov AA, Shevchenko OY. Formation of Benchmark Indicators and the Integrated Evaluation of Territories. In: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference "Competitive, Sustainable and Secure Development of the Regional Economy: Response to Global Challenges" (CSSDRE 2018). Series:Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research (AEBMR). Netherlands: Atlantis Press; 2018. P. 292–296. https://doi.org/10.2991/cssdre-18.2018.62

8. Sheina SG, Babenko LL, Matveiko RB, Khamavova AA. Kompleksnaya Otsenka Territorii v Gradostroitel'stve. Monograph. Rostov-on-Don: Rostov State Civil Engineering University Publ.; 2014. 100 p. (In Russ.).

9. Sokolova EP. Otsenka Ehkologicheskogo Sostoyaniya Goroda dlya Tselei Gradostroitel'nogo Regulirovaniya. Extended Abstract of Dr.Sci. (Geography) Dissertation. Moscow: Moscow State University Named After MV Lomonosov; 2018. 27 p. (In Russ.).

10. Aksenova EG. Criteria of Ecological-Economic Efficiency of Environmental Activities in the Urban Environment. Engineering journal of Don. 2012;4(1):100. (In Russ.). URL: http://www.ivdon.ru/ru/magazine/archive/n4p1y2012/1062 (accessed: 25.06.2023).

11. Volgin DB. Methodology for the Environmental Assessment of Urban Areas. Tochnaya Nauka. 2017;11:85–92. (In Russ.). URL: https://t-nauka.ru/wp-content/uploads/v11.pdf (accessed: 22.06.2023).

12. Moskalenko AP. Sotsial'nyi i Ehkologo-Ehkonomicheskii Mekhanizm Prinyatiya Investitsionnykh Reshenii v Prirodopol'zovanii. Monograph. Novocherkassk: Job Training Center "Nabla" of South Russian State Technical University (Novocherkassk Polytechnic Institute); 2014. 313 p. (In Russ.).

13. Davankov AYu, Vereshchagina TA, Gryazev MA. Sotsio-Ehkologo-Ehkonomicheskaya Ehffektivnost' Territorii. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice. 2010;12(177):11–18. (In Russ.).

14. Petrishchev VP, Dubrovskaya SA. Method of Comprehensive Environmental Assessment of Urban Areas. Izvestia of Samara Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2013;15(3):234–237. (In Russ.).

15. Aksenova EG. Kompleksnaya Ehkologo-Ehkonomicheskaya Otsenka Sostoyaniya Gorodskikh Territorii v Tselyakh Obespecheniya Ustoichivoi Sistemy Prirodopol'zovaniya. Extended Abstract of Dr.Sci. (Economics) Dissertation. Rostov-on-Don: Rostov State Civil Engineering University; 2013. 24 p. (In Russ.).

16. Aksenov AA. Rynok Zhil'ya i Formirovanie Sotsial'noi Zashchity Naseleniya. Dr.Sci. (Economics) Dissertation. Rostov-on-Don: North-Caucasus Academy of Public Administration; 2004. (In Russ.).

17. Bespalov VI, Maksyukova YuYu. Technique of the Complex Socially Ecologically Economic Estimation of the Condition of the Built Up Territories. Ekologiya cheloveka (Human Ecology). 2007(4):17–19. (In Russ.).