인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
Despite advancements in satellite technology producing a vast array of high-resolution, multitemporal imagery, its application in urban planning remains concentrated in limited domains. This study systematically analyzes the status of satellite image-based indicators within domestic urban planning research. A review of 133 relevant domestic academic papers identified 79 unique indicators. Accounting for overlapping applications across analytical dimensions, 307 indicator instances were extracted and categorized based on a three-dimensional framework comprising indicator type (single, composite, combined), planning domain, and planning step. A coding manual grounded in the National Land Planning and Utilization Act was established before the analysis to ensure classification objectivity, and all indicator names were standardized using well-known remote sensing terminology. The analysis revealed that the top five indicators—land cover, normalized difference vegetation index, land surface temperature, normalized difference built-up index, and urbanized area—accounted for 56.1% (172 instances) of the total. In terms of indicator types, 86.6% were classified as “single” indicators, whereas “combined” indicators, which integrate satellite imagery with ancillary spatial data (e.g., socioeconomic or topographic data), accounted for only 9.4%. Land cover alone accounted for 61 instances, whereas the remaining 74 indicators outside the top five collectively represented 135 instances (44.0%), with each appearing in six or fewer instances. This finding suggests that research remains skewed toward intuitive and policy-proven indicators addressing recurring urban issues such as sprawl, green space loss, and urban heat islands. Usage was predominantly focused on the “urban survey and future forecasting” step (87.3%), with minimal application in “goal setting” or “plan evaluation.” This disparity reflects a structural constraint in which satellite-derived information serves primarily as a descriptive tool rather than a proactive instrument for long-term monitoring or policy feedback. Ultimately, this study emphasizes the need to diversify satellite-based indicators by integrating multisource spatial data, thereby enhancing the quantitative evidence base and evaluative capacity of future urban planning processes.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
