Urban Regeneration Potential Land Evaluation Based on GIS and MCDA: A Case Study of London
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61173/9pyx2s97Keywords:
MCDA, GIS Spatial analysis, Urban renewal, Potential evaluationAbstract
In the context of housing shortages, a fragile transportation system, stagnant productivity growth, and unequal community development, the spatial optimization of urban renewal in London faces unprecedented pressure. This study constructs a potential evaluation model based on GIS spatial analysis and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), using natural, economic, and social dimensions as the criterion layer, and six factors including elevation, slope, environment (forests and water sources), building density, transportation, and infrastructure (education and healthcare) as the indicator layer. The final weights of each factor are determined through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the entropy weight method. The results evaluate the potential land for urban renewal in London. The evaluation is divided into five levels, among which high-potential areas account for approximately 5.75 percent of the total urban area and show a fragmented spatial distribution, providing important references for the spatial layout and site selection of future urban renewal in London.
References
[1] Saaty T L. The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
[2] S. Kapilan, K. Elangovan. Potential Landfill Site Selection for Solid Waste Disposal Using GIS and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), Journal of Central South University, 2018, 25(3): 570-585.
[3] Greater London Authority. The London Plan 2021. London: Greater London Authority, 2021.
[4] Zarin R, Azmat M, Naqvi S R, Saddique Q, Ullah S, et al. Landfill Site Selection by Integrating Fuzzy Logic, AHP, and WLC Method Based on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021, 28(16): 19726-19741.
[5] ZHANG Jin-cao. Analysis of Prominent Problems and Countermeasures in Urban Renewal: A Case Study of Jinan. Future City Design and Management, 2023(1): 48-52.
[6] Yingcheng LI, Xiaohan ZHONG, Junheng QI, et al. Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Urban Spatial Growth in China Based on Building Density Distribution. Urban Planning International, 2024, 39(02): 9-19.
[7] Weiran TIAN, Yanling XU, Ying HUANG. Comparative Analysis of AHP and Entropy Weight Method in Urban Street Landscape Evaluation, Journal of Southwest China Normal University (Natural Science Edition), 2020, 45(9): 147-153.
[8] Yucheng D, Guiqing Z, Wei-Chiang H, Yinfeng X, et al. Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method, Collaborative Decision Making, 2010, 49(3): 281-289.
[9] Ludovic-Alexandre Vidal, Franck Marle, Jean-Claude Bocquet. Using a Delphi Process and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Evaluate the Complexity of Projects, Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, 38(5): 5388-5405.
[10] Jihad Awad, Chuloh Jung. Extracting the Planning Elements for Sustainable Urban Regeneration in Dubai with AHP (analytic Hierarchy Process)[J], Sustainable cities and society, 2022, 76.
[11] Xiaoyan WANG, Silong ZHANG, Lei LIU. Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation of Water Environmental Carrying Capacity Based on AHP-Entropy Weight Method. Environmental Science & Technology, 2021, 44(09): 206-212.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 by the authors.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
