سنجش و ارزیابی مناطق کلان‌شهر تهران از نظر شاخص های شکوفایی شهری

فصلنامه علمی و پژوهشی پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهری

مقاله 5، دوره 12، شماره 44، اردیبهشت 1400، صفحه 75-92   

نوع مقاله: مقاله برگرفته از پایان نامه

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30495/jupm.2021.4172

نویسندگان

مرتضی محمدخانی^{* 1}؛ زینب کرکه ابادی²؛ عباس ارغان³

¹دانشجوی دکترای گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، واحد سمنان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، سمنان، ایران

²دانشیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری ، واحد سمنان ،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی،سمنان ، ایران

³دانشیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی ، واحد سمنان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، سمنان، ایران

تاریخ دریافت: 26 دی 1398،  تاریخ بازنگری: 02 اسفند 1398،  تاریخ پذیرش: 04 اسفند 1398 

چکیده

امروزه شهرها به ‌منظور رقابت در عرصه بین المللی سعی در ارتقا زیرساخت‌های خود، جهت دستیابی به نوآوری و شکوفایی دارند. از این‌رو، بررسی جایگاه شهرها از منظر شاخص های شکوفایی شهری امر مهمی در بحث شهرسازی پایدار می باشد. در این راستا، هدف پژوهش حاضر سنجش و ارزیابی مناطق کلان‌شهر تهران از نظر شاخص های شکوفایی شهری است. روش پژوهش، توصیفی- تحلیلی و هدف گذاری آن کاربردی است. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل اطلاعات از مدل های کمی آنتروپی شانون، واسپاس (WASPAS)، ضریب پراکندگی (C.V)، آمار خودهمبستگی فضایی موران و از نرم‌افزار Arc GIS استفاده‌شده است. نتایج حاصل از پژوهش نشان می دهد که الگوی توزیع فضایی شاخص های شکوفایی شهری در سطح مناطق 22 گانه شهر تهران به‌صورت خوشه ای است و مناطق 22، 1 و 2 به ترتیب با کسب میزان امتیاز واسپاس 4492/0، 1981/0 و 1938/0 از لحاظ برخورداری از شاخص های شکوفایی شهری در بین مناطق 22 گانه در رتبه های اول تا سوم قرار دارند. در سوی دیگر منطقه 8 با کسب کمترین میزان واسپاس 0439/0 در جایگاه آخر قرارگرفته است. از نظر آماری حدود 5/0 درصد از مناطق در وضعیت برخوردار، 36/0 درصد در وضعیت نیمه برخوردار و 59/0 درصد در وضعیت نامطلوب قرار دارند. از نظر جغرافیایی می توان گفت که برخورداری مناطق از شاخص های شکوفایی شهری از  سمت شمال به جنوب و از شرق به غرب تهران سیر نزولی دارند و از  میزان آن کاسته شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

شکوفایی شهری؛ توسعه پایدار شهری؛ شاخص های شکوفایی شهری؛ کلان‌شهر تهران

عنوان مقاله [English]

Measurement and evaluation of metropolitan areas of Tehran in terms of Urban Prosperity Index (CPI) indicators

نویسندگان [English]

morteza mohammadkhani¹؛ zeynab karkehabadi²؛ abas arghan³

¹, Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran

²Associate Professor of Geography, Semnan University, Semnan Azad University, Semnan, Iran

³Department of Geography & Urban Planning, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran

چکیده [English]

Today, cities are the key to developing countries, and in order to compete in the international arena, they are trying to upgrade their infrastructure to encourage and achieve innovation and prosperity. Hence, the study of the status of Urban Prosperity Index (CPI) indicators and efforts to achieve balanced development along with participation is an important issue in sustainable urban development. In this regard, the purpose of this study is to measure and evaluate the metropolitan areas of Tehran in terms of urban growth indices. The research method is descriptive-analytical and its purpose is applied. For data analysis, Shannon, WASPAS, Spread coefficient (C.V), spatial morphometric dependency statistics and Arc GIS software have been used for analyzing the information. The results of the research show that the spatial distribution pattern of Urban Prosperity Index (CPI) in the 22 areas of Tehran is clustered, and the 22, 1 and 2 regions with scores of scores and spas were 0.4492, 0.1938 and 0.1938 are in the first to third positions in terms of having Urban Prosperity Index (CPI) indicators among the 22 regions. On the other hand, the area 8 has been at the lowest level with the lowest level of 0.0439. Statistically, about % 0.5 of the regions are in a state of affairs, 36.3% are in semi-possessive condition and 0.59% in unfavorable condition. Geographically, it can be said that the enjoyment of the regions from the northern to south and east to west of Tehran is decreasing and decreasing.
Key words: Urban Prosperity, sustainable urban development, Urban Prosperity Index (CPI), Tehran metropolis.
 



 


 
 



 
 
 
Extended abstract
Introduction:
In today's world, cities have become the main place of work and life of humans (Aliakbari & Akbari, 2017: 2). If, in the not too distant past, cities were exceptional and scarce phenomena, they would have become the main human and normative place of residence today (Kelark, 2009: 6). As the last century has been called the century of industrial revolution, the present century is referred to as the century of the urban revolution (Ghorbani, 2014: 116). Urbanization is one of the major phenomena of contemporary times and as a phenomenon that, due to the interplay of different and indispensable aspects of modern life, is one of the important factors affecting the personal and social health of citizens and the manifestation of a network of complex social relationships. It is also the bedrock of many of the key challenges in citizen life. Most major cities with problems such as ethnic segregation, land use segregation, workplace segregation, exhaustion and deterioration, increased traffic, deprivation and socio-economic inequalities, health, welfare, inequality in access to health services, Are facing educational, recreational and .... Given these conditions, today various approaches have been put in place in the cities of the world, including ecological city, smart growth, sustainability, urbanism and urban prosperity. These approaches, however, overlap in addressing people's satisfaction, residents' evaluations of the environment, security, health, quality of place, popularity, and policy making. Roots and backgrounds are different. Urban Prosperity was presented in 2012 at the United Nations Human Resettlement Program by the Executive Director of Human Settlements Johnclos. This approach, called urban prosperity, is a social structure that operates in the realm of human actions. It is a broad and broad concept that works in a transparent, balanced and harmonious development environment in a climate of fairness and justice. Blossoming has a more complex concept that has been described as describing success, health, progress and good living. The main purpose of Habitat was to present this approach to improve the quality of human-scale urban spaces in modern cities. In fact, the UNHCR believes that the path to sustainable development is passing through cities and that planning and urban development must be taken into account in order to achieve sustainable development. Urban prosperity is a multifaceted and complex issue. Understanding these complexities, parameters of access, evaluation and measurement, is important and a flourishing life, including other intangible and intangible dimensions such as having a role in the future of your city, having meaningful relationships, belonging to the community. Support and having the resources and capabilities needed to transform individual dreams into reality. Urban prosperity is a multifaceted and complex issue. Understanding these complexities, the parameters of access, evaluation and measurement, is important.
Methodology:
In the present study, the type of applied research and its method is descriptive-analytical. Librarian and documentary methods were also used for data collection. Based on the mentioned method, the research indicators were extracted from a survey of the basics and literature in the field of urban prosperity. The studied geographical area is Tehran metropolis and its 22 regions based on the political divisions of 2016. Also entropy, multivariate decision making technique, dispersion coefficient (C.V) and spatial autocorrelation (Moran's) in Arc Gis software were used for data analysis. In this study, the following index has been used to study the status of 22 metropolitan areas of Tehran in terms of urban prosperity indices.
Results:
       To analyze of studied parks in terms of safety, a decision matrix was formed. The weight and importance of each criterion were calculated using Hierarchical Analysis (AHP). Among the indicators, physical accessibility (0.221) is more important. Lighting (0.220) is in second place, the calculated weights for physical safety index (0.126), safety feeling (0.122), and health safety (0.083) which are in next order.
According to the results obtained, zones 22, 1 and 2 were ranked 4422, 0. 1981 and 0.938, respectively, in terms of having urban prosperity indices among the 22 zones, respectively. The first to third are. On the other hand, Region 8 is in the last position with the lowest amount of Vaspas 0.039. Statistically, about 0.5% of the regions are in favorable status, 0.36% are in semi-favorable situation and 0.59% are in poor condition. Geographically, it can be said that the areas of urban prosperity indexes are decreasing from north to south and east to west of Tehran and have declined.
Conclusion:
This paper aims to measure and evaluate Tehran metropolitan areas in terms of urban prosperity indices as a new approach in world urban planning. The results showed that zones 22, 1 and 2 were ranked first to third in terms of having urban prosperity indices, with a score of 0.4492, 0. 1981 and 0.938, respectively. have. On the other hand, District 8 is in the last position with the lowest rate of Vaspas 0.0393, which is statistically about 0.5% of the areas, 0.36% in the semi-poor and 0.59% in the unfavorable situation. Geographically, it can be said that the urban prosperity indexes are decreasing from north to south and east to west of Tehran and have decreased. According to these results, the 22 metropolitan areas of Tehran were relatively well on their way to prosperity. Unfavorable areas of Tehran in terms of poor prosperity have characteristics in terms of quality of life, infrastructure and environment, deviated urban form and structure, functional structural problems, chronic inequality of opportunity, lack of balanced development and public participation and capital. Inappropriate placement on innovative and thriving urban projects is the lack of supportive social programs.
The results of scattering coefficient (c.v) model also showed that the total dispersion coefficient (c.v) was 1.05%, indicating a deep development gap between the 22 metropolitan areas of Tehran in terms of urban prosperity indices. Also the results of Moran's Spatial Correlation Statistics showed that the spatial distribution pattern of urban prosperity indices in the 22 metropolitan areas of Tehran is clustered. These results indicate the imbalance and inequality of metropolitan areas of Tehran with studied, reflection and outcome indicators, political economy, urban planning system failures and direct relationship with economic and social situation in the studied community.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Urban Prosperity, sustainable urban development, Urban Prosperity Index (CPI), Tehran metropolis

مراجع

1. Ahadnejad, Mohsen, Hazari, Safia, Meshkini, Abolfazl, Piri, Eesa (2017): Identification of Key Factors Influencing Urban Prosperity with Predictive Approach (Case Study: Tabriz Metropolitan Area), Urban  Planning, 9(32),15-30.
2. Ahmadi Nokhostin, Maryam (2016): Explaining Qazvin's Urban Blossoming Pattern, PhD Thesis in Geography and Urban Planning, Assistant Professors Dr. Karamatollah Ziyari and Dr. Ahmad Pour Ahmad, University of Tehran.
3.  Ali Akbari, Esmaeil, Akbari, Majid (2017): Interpretive Structural Modeling of Factors Affecting Tehran Metropolitan Life, Space Planning and Preparation,21(1), 1-31.
4.  Ali Akbari, Esmaeil, Akbari, Majid (2019): Urban Development of Knowledge-Based Development of Strategic Plan of Tehran Metropolis, Geography of Urban Planning Research, 7(1), 170-151.
5. Arab, P., (2018). City Prosperity Initiative Index: Using AHP Method to Recalculate the Weights of Dimensions and SubDimensions in Reference to Tehran Metropolis, European Journal of Sustainable Development (2017),6, 4, pp.289-301.
6. Bazvandi, Farshad, Shahbazi, Mehrdad (2014): The Role of Living in Creating a Mental Image citizens and the Rate of Utilization of Urban Space (Case Study: Tehran Sepahsalar Street), Landscape Research 1(1). 33-43.
7. Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., Ariccio, S., Cancellieri, U. G., & Rahimi, L. (2015). Perceived residential environment quality indicators (PREQIs) relevance for UN-HABITAT City Prosperity Index (CPI). Habitat International, 45, pp. 53-63.
8.  Clarke, David (2009): The Urban World, The World City, Translated by Mehdi Gharklu and Forough Khazaeinejad, Selection Publication, Tehran.
9. Habitat, U. N & Word Urban Compaing, (2013). Cities Prosperty Initiative Toolkit.
10. Habitat, U. N. (2013). State of the world's cities2012/2013: Prosperity of cities. Routledge.
11. Habitat, U. N. (2015). Urbanization For Prosperity, 25th Session of the Governing Council 25th Session of the Governing Council, 17 - 23 April, ,Nairobi.
12.  Habitat, U. N. (2016). The City Prosperity Initiative, United Nations Human Settlements Programme, February, 2016.
13. Iran Census Center (2016): Census of Population and Housing, Tehran, 2016.
     Maleki, Saeed, Madanloo Jouybari, Masoud (2016): Urban Prosperity, Jihad-e-Akhlu Publications, Tehran.
14. Jackson, T., & Senker, P. (2011). Prosperity without growth: Economics for a finite planet. Energy & Environment, 22(7), pp.1013-1016.
15. Jones, S., Tefe, M., & Appiah-Opoku, S. (2015). Incorporating stakeholder input into transport project selection–A step towards urban prosperity in developing countries?. Habitat International, 45, pp. 20-28.
16. Kharazmi, Omid Ali, Nedaei, Amin (2014): The Impact of Trust on the Prosperity of Innovation in Cities: A Study of Tehran Campus Science and Technology Park, Public Administration, (2) 6, 248-227.
17. Mohtashami, Negar (2014): The Process of Forming Extraordinary Architecture Based on Urban Blossom Indicators in Iran (Example: Design of Darakeh Tehran Neighborhood), M.Sc., Tarbiat Modares University, Faculty of Art and Architecture.
18. Safaeipour, Masoud, Maleki, Saeed, Hatamiinejad, Hossein, Medanlou Jouybari, Masood (2016): Evaluation and Measurement of Urban Prosperity Components in Ahvaz Metropolitan, Geography and Environmental Sustainability,22, 47-35.
19. Sands, G. (2015). Measuring the prosperity of cities. Habitat International, (45), pp.1-2.
20.  Sharafi, Hojatallah, Khabazi, Mostafa, Soleimani Damne, Mojtaba (2016): Measuring Tourism Impacts of Historical Monuments with Urban Prosperity Approach (Case Study: Hills Near Jiroft Sandals), Urban Tourism, 2(4), 19-36.
21. Van Kamp, I., Leidelmeijer, K., Marsman, G., & De Hollander, A. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human well-being: towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study. Landscape and urban planning, 65(1), pp.5-18.
22. Wong, C. (2015). A framework for ‘City Prosperity Index’: Linking indicators, analysis and policy. Habitat International, 45, pp. 3-9.
23. www.camsys.com/kb experts-livability. Htms.
24. Yigitcanlar, T., Dur, F., & Dizdaroglu, D. (2015). Towards prosperous sustainable cities: A multiscalar urban sustainability assessment approach. Habitat International, 45, pp.36-46.