Analysis of the most important indicators of effective management approaches in urban development (case study: Kangan Port)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Professor of Geography and Urban Planning, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Researcher of geography and urban planning, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran.

3 PhD Student in Geography and Urban Planning, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Introduction
The city is a dynamic and complex phenomenon that functions as a system. According to the United Nations report, for the first time in history, more than half of the world's population lives in cities, which will reach 70% in 2050. Urban management is responsible for monitoring, planning and managing the sustainable development of cities. Since top-down urban management in practice has led to many urban problems, and the effectiveness of decision-making patterns has caused the creation of various management approaches; whose purpose is to understand human behavior and change consumption patterns towards more sustainable paths. In our country, urban management has been affected by macro structures and the environment, which has resulted in lagging behind (urbanization) and overtaking (growth) from (urban development). Therefore, the lack of participatory democracy, planning and management, and the lack of coordination of urban plans with construction plans, inattention to the specific conditions and prevailing performance of each city are among the challenges of the current urban planning and management system in Iran. In such a situation, along with the development of metropolises, the cities that host the oil and gas industry, such as the city of Bandar Kangan, also face challenges such as the rapid development of the city, the increase in the cost of infrastructure, the loss of resources, the disproportion of the distribution of uses, the excessive increase in the price of land and housing, and disorder. environmental problems and hundreds of other challenges and has caused weakness in the proper management of the city from (physical, environmental, economic, social-cultural and management-political) aspects; Therefore, urban management can only be managed with a bottom-up planning that firstly enjoys the participation and support of citizens and secondly uses a combination of management approaches in the matter of managing cities and guiding them in the path of sustainability. work successfully.
 
Methodology
This research is developmental in terms of purpose and in terms of descriptive-analytical and
 
causal-survey method. Collecting information using documentary-library and field method (observation, interview and questionnaire). After extracting and comparing indicators in the approaches of political economy, empowerment, urban democracy, neighborhood-based management, social capital, traditional urban management, NGO, public choice, urban participation, pluralism, integrated urban management, sustainable urban development, good governance and Urban development strategy, important and common indicators in line with the management approaches of urban development were categorized in the form of 5 physical, environmental, economic, social/cultural and managerial/political dimensions. Each of these dimensions has sub-criteria that form the basis of the current research questionnaire. In order to investigate and explain the most important components of effective management approaches in urban development and Analysis the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to realize the desired urban development in Kangan city, factor analysis and SWOT models have been used. In this research, the trustees, experts and citizens of Kangan city are considered as statistical communities. The sampling method was random sampling, and the snowball method was used for statistical communities of trustees (48 people) and experts (90 people), and the sample size of the citizens of Kangan city (382 people) was determined using Cochran's method.
 
Results and Discussion
Analysis of the most effective factors in Kangan city management. In order to identify the underlying dimensions of the research, the factor analysis method was used, which the main management components in the development of Kangan city were prioritized from the point of view of the trustees compared to the research variables, and included factors (physical/economic), (management-political/social), (economic) / social) and (environmental / physical) that these factors explain 56% of the total variance. Analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of effective management approaches in the development of Kangan city by integrating the opinion of the target communities. The results of the SWOT analysis show that there is a gap with democratic citizenship, the effect of sanctions and currency shocks on the city's economy, and the lack of fair provision of services with a score of 0.18 are the most important weaknesses in the system that need to be improved in terms of planning. The impact of the share of oil and the growth of the sales rate and the increase in the level of education and social awareness with a score of 0.22, the role of the government in the economy and funding and investment with a score of 0.21 are the most important opportunities, as well as the effect of financial and monetary policies on the city's economy with a score of 0.24. Paying attention to the rules and management of urban development and not paying attention to demographic characteristics with a score of 0.23 are considered as threat factors against effective management approaches in the development of Kangan city.
 
Conclusion
In this research, the most important indicators of effective management approaches in the development of Kangan city were examined and explained. In order to find the important factors from the point of view of Kangan city trustees, factor analysis was used, the results show: ‌(physical /economic),(management-political/social),(economic/social)and (environmental /physical) factors respectively have the highest percentage. has allocated the variance. Also, using the SWOT model, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of urban development in Kangan Port were identified. The results indicate that the opportunity points have the highest score of 3.51 and the strengths have the lowest score of 2.38. The results of QSPM also show that providing public benefits and meeting basic needs to increase social justice, coordinating trustees and strengthening integrated management to organize the city in order to achieve urban sustainability, increasing trust and validation to improve adaptability and flexibility, planning the development of the tourism industry to reduce The reliance of Kangan's economy on oil and gas is one of the most effective strategies in the development of Kangan city; Among these strategies, priority is given to managerial/political and economic indicators.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Ahadnejad, M., Heydari, M.T., Teymouri, A. & Tahmasebi Moghadam, H. (2017). An analysis of the indicators of urban development strategy (CDS) with a strategic planning approach (case study: Zanjan city), Quarterly Journal of Urban Development Studies,Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 4-22. https://civilica.com/doc/949121/. [Persian].
  2. Alizadeh, H., Nemati, M. & Rezaei Jafari, K. (2015). an analysis of good urban governance criteria using the fuzzy hierarchical analysis method, Urban and Regional Studies and Researches, 6, No. 24, pp. 105-128. Journals.ui.ac.ir/article_20118.html [Persian].
  3. Ariti, A.T., Vliet, J.V. & Verburg, P.H. (2018). What restrains Ethiopian NGOs to participate in the development of policies for natural resource management? Environmental Science and policy, Vol. 89, pp. 292-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.08.008
  4. Babaee Siahkolroud, J. (2021). the role of non-governmental organizations in the development of touristic cities, Social Science Studies Quarterly, 7, No. 1, pp.16-29. www.uctjournals.com [Persian].
  5. Barati, N., Heidari, F. & Sattarzad Fathi, M. (2019). towards a democratic process in urban planning and design; Assessing the state of citizens' intervention in Iran's urban plans and projects, Bagh Nazar Scientific Journal, 16, No., 76, pp. 5-20. Doi:10.22034/bagh.2019.135523.3627 [Persian].
  6. Benites, A.J. & Simoes , A.F. (2021). Assessing the urban sustainable development strategy: An application of a smart city services sustainability taxonomy, Ecological Indicators,Vol.127, pp. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107734
  7. Beukers, E. & Bertolini, L. (2021). Learning for transitions: An experiential learning strategy for urban experiments, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, Vol. 40, pp. 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.09.004
  8. Bjørgen, A., Fossheim, K. & Macharis, C. (2021). How to build stakeholder participation in collaborative urban freight planning, Cities, Vol.112, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103149
  9. Corral-Montoya, F., Telias, M. & Malz, N. (2022). Unveiling the political economy of fossil fuel extractivism in Colombia: Tracing the processes of phase-in, entrenchment, and lock-in, Energy Research & Social Science, Vol. 88, pp.1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102377
  10. Deng, Y., Qi, W., Fu, B. & Wang, K. (2019). Geographical transformations of urban sprawl: Exploring the spatial heterogeneity across cities in China 1992–2015, Cities,Vol 105.No 1, pp. 1-13. DOI:1016/j.cities.2019.102415
  11. Edwards Jr, B. (2019). Shifting the perspective on community-based management of education: From systems theory to social capital and community empowerment, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 64, No.1, pp. 17-26 . DOI:1016/j.ijedudev.2018.11.004
  12. Ferris, S. p., Javakhadze, D. & Rajkovic. (2017). An International Analysis of CEO Social Capital and Corporate Risk-Taking, European Financial Management, Vol. 25, pp. 3-37. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3037285
  13. Franco-Torres, M., Kvålshaugen, R. & Ugarelli, R.M. (2021). Understanding the governance of urban water services from an institutional logics perspective, Utilities Policy, Vol. 68, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2020.101159
  14. Goddard, A. (2021). Accountability and accounting in the NGO field comprising the UK and Africa – A Bordieusian analysis, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 78, pp. 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2020.102200
  15. Goggins, G., Fahy, F. & Jensen, Ch.L. (2019). Sustainable transitions in residential energy use: Characteristics and governance of urban-based initiatives across Europe, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 237, pp. 1-11. DOI:1016/j.jclepro.2019.117776
  16. Hajiani, E., Rezaei, A. A.& Fallahzadeh, M. A.R. (2012). Social trust in urban management and factors affecting it, Quarterly Journal of Social Studies and Research,1, No. 2, pp. 55-90.
  1.  Doi: 10.22059/JISR.2012.36556 [Persian].
  2. Hataminejad, H.& Faraji Mollaie, A. (2011). feasibility of implementing urban development strategy (CDS) plans in Iran, urban and regional studies and researches, 2, No. 8, pp. 55-76. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/153089/fa [Persian].
  3. Hataminejad, H., Hamghadam, No. & Kanooni, R. (2022). Analyzing the components of good urban governance in creating residential satisfaction with a future research approach (case study: Rasht city), Scientific Journal of Geography and Planning, 26, No. 81, pp. 61-43. Doi:gp.2021.47741.2887/10.22034 [Persian].
  4. Helliwell, J.F., Hafang, h., Shawn, G. & Shun, W. (2018). Emperical Linkages between Good governance AND National Well being. Journal of Comparative Economics, Vol. 46, No.4, pp. 1332 – 1346. DOI:1016/j.jce.2018.01.004
  5. Kamanroudi Kojouri, M. (2010). Structural Pathology of Tehran's Urban Development Management with Emphasis on Adapting Urban Spaces for the Disabled, Urban Management Quarterly, 25, pp.99-114. Sid .https://sid.ir/paper/92227/fa [Persian].
  6. Kaufmann, D. (2010). "The World Wide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues", The World Bank Development Ressarch Group Macro economics and Growth Team September.
  7. Lazaro, B. & Théry, M. ) 2019(. Empowering communities? Local stakeholders’ participation in the Clean Development Mechanism in Latin America. World Development, Vol. 114, pp. 254- 266. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.10.005
  8. Leyzerova, A., Sharovarova, E. & Alekhin,V. (2016). Sustainable Strategies of Urban Planning, International Conference on Industrial Engineering, ICIE 2016, Procedia Engineering,Vol.150, pp. 2055-2061. doi: 10.1016/j. proeng.07.299
  9. Liu, G., Fu, X., Han, Q., Huang, R. & Zhuang, T. (2021). Research on the collaborative governance of urban regeneration based on a Bayesian network: The case of Chongqing, Land Use Policy journal, Vol. 109, pp. 1-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105640
  10. Li, J., Krishnamurthy, S., Roders, A.P. & Wesemael, P.V. (2021). Imagine the Old Town of Lijiang: Contextualising community participation for urban heritage management in China, Habitat International, Vol. 108, No.4, pp. 1-11. DOI:10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102321
  11. Loizia, P., Voukkali, I., Zorpas, A.A., Pedreño, J.N., Chatziparaskeva, G., Inglezakis, V.J., Vardopoulos, I. & Doula, M. (2021). Measuring the level of environmental performance in insular areas, through key performed indicators, in the framework of waste strategy development, journal Science of the Total Environment, Vol.753, pp. 1-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141974
  12. Mallick, S.K. (2021). Prediction-Adaptation-Resilience (PAR) approach- A new pathway towards future resilience and sustainable development of urban landscape, Geography and Sustainability, Vol. 2, pp. 127–133. DOI:10.1016/j.geosus.2021.06.002
  13. Mashhadi Moghaddam, S.N. & Rafieian, M. (2020). From the kingdom lash to participation: The tale of urban planning in Iran, Social Sciences & Humanities Open, Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 1-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100022
  14. Medeiros, T. & Van der zwet, A. (2020). Sustainable and Integrated Urban Planning and Governace in Metropolitan and Medium-Sized Cities, Sustainability, 12, No.15, pp. 1-19. DOI:10.3390/su12155976
  15. Meyer, N. & Auriacombe, CH. (2019). Good Urban Governace and City Resilience: An Afrocentric Approach to Sustainable Development, Sustainability, 11, No.19, pp. 1-18. DOI:10.3390/su11195514
  16. Milojevic, B. (2018). INTEGRATED URBAN PLANNING IN THEORY AND PRACTICE, САВРЕМЕНА ТЕОРИЈА И ПРАКСА У ГРАДИТЕЉСТВУ, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 323-337. DOI: 10.7251/STP1813323M
  17. Mohamed, N., Elfeky, S., Khashoggi, M., Ibrahim, S., Aliahia, A., Al Shatti, A., El-Ziq, I. & Alhindi, B. (2020). Community Participation and Empowerment in Healthy Cities Initiative: Experience from the Eastern Mediterranean Region, Social Behavior Research & Health (SBRH), Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 553-565. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/sbrh.v4i2.4684
  18. Mouratidis, K. & Yiannakou, A. (2022). What makes cities livable? Determinants of neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood happiness in different contexts, Land Use Policy, Vol. 112, pp. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105855
  19. Muhamad Khair, N.KH., Ern Lee, KH. & Mokhtar, M. (2020). Sustainable City and Community Empowermentthrough the Implementation of Community-Based Monitoring: A Conceptual Approach, Sustainability, 12, No.22, pp. 1-16. DOI:10.3390/su12229583
  20. Navajas-Romero, v., Lopez del Rio, L.C. & Villamandos, N.C. (2020). Analysis of Wellbeing in Nongovernmental Organizations ‘Workplace in Developed Area Context, international Journal of Environmental Research and public Health, Vol.17, No.16, pp.1-21. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17165818
  21. Nielsen, B.F., Baer, D. & Lindkvist, C. (2019). Identifying and supporting exploratory and exploitative models of innovation in municipal urban planning; key challenges from seven Norwegian energy ambitious neighborhood pilots, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, Vol.142, pp. 142-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.11.007
  22. Peng, J., Zhao, Zh. & Yin, G. (2022). Evaluation of urban land resource value based on sustainable environment space governance, Alexandria Engineering Journal, Vol. 61, No. 6, pp. 5585–5593. DOI:10.1016/j.aej.2021.11.042
  23. Pirbabaei, M. T. & Rahmani, J. (2017). citizens' participation in urban management according to Allameh Tabatabai's view, scientific-research quarterly of social theories of Muslim thinkers, 6, No. 2, pp. 311-331. https://doi.org/10.22059/jstmt.2018.219687.1083 [Persian].
  24. Salari Sardari, F. A.& Kiani, A. (2017). Analysis of Iran's Urban Management Pattern (Structure, Performance and Strategy), Urban Management Studies Quarterly,9, No. 32, pp. 52-35. https://ums.srbiau.ac.ir/article_12573.html [Persian].
  25. Selseng, T., Linnerud, K. & Holden, E. (2022). Unpacking democracy: The effects of different democratic qualities on climate change performance over time, Environmental Science and Policy, Vol. 128, pp. 326–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.12.009
  26. Sisto, R., Lopolito, A. & Vliet, M. (2018). Stakeholder Participation in Planning Rural Development Strategies: Using Back casting to support Local Action Groups in complying with CLLD requirements, Land Use Policy, 70, pp. 442-450. DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.022
  27. Smørdal, O., Ebbing Wensaas, K., Lopez-Aparicio, S., Pettersen, I.N. & Hoelscher, K. (2016). Key issues for enhancing citizen participation in co-constructing city futures, Fourth International Workshop on Cultures of Participation in the Digital Age - CoPDA 2016 Gothenburg (Sweden), pp. 68-75. http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-62055
  28. Statistical yearbook of Bushehr province. (2020). https://www.mpob.ir [Persian].
  29. Taghvaei, M., Bosshaq, M. R.& Salarvand, I. (2012). Testing research hypotheses using SPSS, Isfahan, Moazzami Publications. [Persian].
  30. Taghvaei, M.& Kiumarsi, H. (2012). Application of tourism planning and management techniques and models, Isfahan, Moazzami Publications. [Persian].
  31. Taghvaei, M.& Kiumarsi, H. (2016). The application of techniques in urban and regional planning, Nagarkhaneh Publications. [Persian].
  32. Taghvaei, M.& Safarabadi, A. (2011). the role of urban management in achieving sustainable development of urban tourism, a case study - the city of Kermanshah, Geographical Studies of Dry Areas, 1, No. 4, pp. 35-52. Sid. https://sid.ir/paper/190690/fa [Persian].
  33. Tennøy, A., Gundersen, F. & Øksenholt, K.V. (2022). Urban structure and sustainable modes’ competitiveness in small and medium-sized Norwegian cities, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 105, pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103225
  34. Turner, V.K. (2022). The environmental consequences of residential land tenure in single family neighborhoods, Land Use Policy, Vol. 114, No. 2, pp. 1-10. DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105959
  35. Valigholizadeh, A. & Khyri, T. (2016). Explaining the role of centralism in creating urban management challenges in Iran, Journal of Political Geography, 1, No. 1, pp. 27-53. https://doi.org/10.22067/pg.v1i1.47785 [Persian].
  36. Yousaf, M., Ihsan, F. & Ellahi, A. (2016). Exploring the impact of good governance on citizens' trust in Pakistan. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 33, No.1, pp. 200-209. DOI:10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.001
  37. Ziari, K., Ghasemi, S., Mahdian Bahnamiri, M. & Mehdi, A. (2015). CDS, a participatory approach in the process of urban development visioning (case study: Mahabad city), scientific-research journal of geography and planning, 20, No. 53, pp. 201-167. https://sid.ir/paper/203670/fa [Persian].