The Fractal Geometry of Urban Land Use: The Case of Ulaanbaatar City, Mongolia

Abstract

Abstract:This research summarizes land use and city expansion, as well as the dynamics of urbanization, over recent years in Ulaanbaatar city, Mongolia. The study applies fractal geometry to describe land uses in Ulaanbaatar city using a mathematical procedure and geographic information system (GIS) urban analysis, and measures urban sprawl using an index relation of area and perimeter. Land-use parcels' shape, area perimeter relations, sprawl statement and geometry of city structure are considered. The research presents the growth of Ulaanbaatar city in two time series, 2000 and 2010. The main findings stated here are that Ulaanbaatar is growing in an unsystematic and fractal way, even though the geometrical growth has not been strictly planned and has a most irregular shape of urban sprawl.

Spatiotemporal Evolution and the Driving Forces of the Coupling Coordination Degree between Urbanization and Urban Residents’ Livelihood Level in Mongolia

“…Previous studies have suggested that rapid expansion in Mongolia has resulted in an inequality in livelihood [7,15], growing air pollution [20], unevenly distributed social goods [21,23], etc., which implies that the urbanization of Mongolia is characterized by a chronic imbalance. However, few studies have incorporated the lack of coordination urbanization into Mongolian urban studies, and most studies have focused only on land expansion [25,95] and environmental changes [96]. This paper has explored the CCD between urbanization and urban residents' livelihood level and its driving forces in detail.…”

“…This is mainly due to a lack of coordination between urbanization and residents' livelihood level. Previous studies have addressed Mongolia's urban development based on Landsat, MODIS(Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer), and other spatial analysis methods, but most of them have focused on urban expansion [7,24,25] and environmental changes [20,21,26]: Only a few studies have incorporated urban residents' livelihood. Although some studies have shown that the excessive expansion of urban areas brings dramatic and critical changes to residents in terms of unfairness, environmental pollution, and congestion [20,22,26,27], the lack of coordination between urbanization and the livelihood level of urban residents in Mongolia has received relatively limited scholarly attention.…”

Estimating Built-Up Area Change in Ulaanbaatar City, Mongolia

“…The main task of governments and communities struggle in our day is how to manage expansion for areas for developing areas in a sustainable way without degrading land values (Myagmartseren et al, 2017;Purevtseren et al, 2018). Urban area spatial dynamics are the most direct and indirect result of the driving force of economic and social changes in a country or region (Sajous et al, 2016).…”

“…Information on existing expansion and the course of spatial change is essential for urban planning and management and provides crucial clues for the future development of Ulaanbaatar urban areas (Myagmartseren et al, 2017;Zhang et al, 2002). Due to accelerated urbanization since the 1950s, most of the Mongolian population, or about 68%, live in urban areas (Purevtseren et al, 2018). Despite the decision maker's effort to limit centralization, halt an increase in the urban population, and promote out-migration from Ulaanbaatar, the city was constructed to be significantly more population-dense than other Mongolian towns and regional cities.…”

Understanding urbanization and its impact on the livelihood levels of urban residents in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

“…However, to date, the relationship between urbanization and the livelihood levels of urban residents has received relatively limited scholarly attention, especially in the context of Mongolia. The literature on Mongolia's urbanization has mainly focused on three aspects, namely, (a) urban land use (Amarsaikhan, Blotevogel, & Chinbat, ; Amarsaikhan et al, ; Purevtseren, Tsegmid, Indra, & Sugar, ), (b) environmental change (Fan, Chen, & John, ; Park, Fan, Ranjeet, & Chen, ; Sukhnaran, ), and (c) migration patterns (Diener & Hagen, ; Guttikunda, Lodoysamba, Bulgansaikhan, & Dashdondog, ; Miller, ; Tsutsumida et al, ). The few studies that analyze the livelihood levels of rural migrants, in turn, are devoted to describing rather than explaining.…”