تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی

تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی

ارزیابی تطبیقی مناطق شهرداری کلان‌شهر تهران از منظر شاخص‌های شهر خلاق

مقالات آماده انتشار
نویسندگان
موسی کمانرودی کجوری
آزاد رحیم زاده
فریده فلاح حسینی
گروه جغرافیا، دانشکده علوم جغرافیایی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
شهرخلاق شهری پرجنب‌وجوش است که یادگیری فرهنگی و بین‌فرهنگی را تقویت می‌کند، جایی که هر ساکن در آن به دانش، مهارت‌ها و آگاهی فرهنگی خود اطمینان دارد. شهرخلاق ویژگی‌هایی را برجسته می‌کند که تصویر شهر را برای ساکنان آن جذاب‌تر می‌نماید. هدف این پژوهش، رتبه‌بندی مناطق شهرداری کلان‌شهر تهران براساس شاخص‌های شهرخلاق است. این پژوهش به‌لحاظ روش، از نوع توصیفی-تحلیلی و از منظر هدف، کاربردی می‌باشد. داده­ها در چهار بعد کیفیت زندگی، سرمایه ‌انسانی، سرمایه اجتماعی و نوآوری و به‌ روش کتابخانه­ای-اسنادی به‌دست آمده است. از مدل تصمیم‌گیری WASPAS برای رتبه‌بندی و از مدل آنتروپی برای وزن‌دهی به شاخص‌ها استفاده شده است. نوآوری این پژوهش، استفاده از رویکرد تطبیقی و مدل جدید در تعیین و ارزیابی شاخص‌های شهرخلاق در مقیاس مناطق شهر است. نتایج حاصل از به­کارگیری مدل تصمیم­گیری WASPAS نشان می­دهدکه بین مناطق بیست‌ودوگانه شهرداری تهران نسبت به شاخص­های شهرخلاق تفاوت وجود دارد. سطح­بندی این مناطق به‌لحاظ شهرخلاق بیانگر این است که هفت منطقه(شش، یک، دوازده، سه، چهار، دو، هفت) دارای وضعیت مطلوب، هشت منطقه دارای وضعیت متوسط و هفت منطقه(نوزده، هیجده، شانزده، بیست ویک، هفده، ده، نه) دارای وضعیت نامطلوب و در اولویت برنامه­ریزی توسعه­ی شهری می‌باشند. همچنین نتایج نشان داد که بعد اقتصادی شهرخلاق دارای بیشترین مناطق(17 منطقه) با شرایط نامطلوب بوده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
شهرخلاق
شهر تهران
مدل WASPAS

عنوان مقاله English

Comparative evaluation of Tehran Metropolitan Municipality regions from the perspective of creative city indicators

نویسندگان English

Mousa Kamanroudi-Kojouri
Azad Rahimzadeh
Farideh Fallah-Hosseini
Department of Geography, Faculty of Geographical Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

A creative city is a vibrant place that fosters cultural and intercultural learning, where every resident feels confident in their knowledge, skills, and cultural awareness. A creative city emphasizes characteristics that make the city more appealing to its residents. The objective of this research is a comparative assessment of Tehran’s metropolitan districts based on creative city indicators. This study is descriptive-analytical in terms of methodology and applied in terms of purpose. Data collection was conducted using a documentary-library method across four dimensions: quality of life, human capital, social capital, and innovation. The WASPAS decision-making model was used for ranking the districts, and the entropy model was applied to weight the indicators. The innovation of this research lies in its use of a comparative approach and a new model for identifying and evaluating creative city indicators at the urban district scale (Tehran metropolis).The results from employing the WASPAS decision-making model reveal differences among the 22 districts of Tehran concerning creative city indicators. The ranking of districts in terms of being a creative city shows that seven districts (6, 1, 12, 3, 4, 2, and 7) have favorable conditions. Eight districts were found to have moderate conditions, while seven districts (19, 18, 16, 21, 17, 10, and 9)respectively, were in unfavorable conditions and prioritized for urban development planning. Moreover, the findings showed that the economic dimension of the creative city had the highest number of districts (17) in unfavorable conditions.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Creative City
Tehran City
WASPAS Model
Acs, Z., & Zegyesi, M. (2009). Creativity and industrial cities: A case study of Baltimore. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21- 439.
AkbariMotlagh, M. (2013). Creative aspects of the theory and its impact on sustainable urban development with an emphasis on international experiences. National Conference on sustainable architecture and urban development, enterprise structures desert,Bukan,Iran.
Berridge, J. (Spring 2006). “The Creative City” Plan, p 21.
Bianchini, F; & Landry, ch;. (1994). The creative city. Published by Comedia.
Carlsson, C; & Fuller, R;. (1996). Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision.
Costa, J, Seixas; & Roldão, A;. (2009, June 2009 4-6 ). “FROM „CREATIVE CITY‟ TO „URBAN CREATIVITY‟ ?SPACE, CREATIVITY AND GOVERNANCE IN THE CONTEMPORARY CITY”. City Futuresʼ09- City Futures in a Globalizing World” EURA/UAA Conference, p2.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. HarperPerennial,New York.
Duxbury, N. (2010). Creative cities in Canada. Translator: Farzinpak. Sh. Municipal educational research journal, 76- 83.
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how its transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life . Basic Books,New York.
Florida, Richard. (2004). The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It‟s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life (Paperback). Basic Books,New York.
Florida, Richard. (2005). Cities and the Creative Class. Routledge (New York, London).
GhafeleMobarakeh, P. (2013). Etymology and terminology creativity. First National Conference on Shhrkhlaq: ideas and challenges in Iran, Qeshm, Iran.
Ghorbani, R., Hossein-Abadi, S & Turani, A. (2013). Creative cities, cultural approach in urban development. Arid regions Geographic Studies, 3 (11), 1-18.
Goldberg-Miller, S. B. D. (2018). Keeping creativity downtown: Policy learning from San Francisco, Seattle,and Vancouver for municipal cultural planning in Toronto . The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society,48(3) , 170-190.
Ibrahimi, M. (2008). Creative City Summit: Implications - policies, case studies of successful and unsuccessful cities. Tehran Urban Planning Center, July, Tehran: Niavaran Community center.
Javid, M.H., Hosianpour, S.H., & AkbariMotlagh, M. (2012). Creative city strategic planning. Tehran: Tahan Publications.
Khosropour, S., Garmsiri, M. (2012). Space creative foresight and the next window. Third Executive Management Conference, the conference hall of the National Library, Tehran, Iran.
Landry, Charles. (2006). “Lineages of the creative city. Research Journal for Creative Cities” (RJCC), vol. 1, no. 1, March.
Leng, K. S. Badarulzaman, N, Samat, N. & Sheikh D, S. R . (2014). “Capitalising on urban cultural resources for creative city development: A conceptual review and the way forward for Malaysia’s George Town”. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 10(5) , 20-29.
McCann, Eugene J. (2007). Inequality and politics in the creative city-region: Questions of livability and state strategy. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 31(1), 188-196.
Ratiu, D. (2013). Creative cities and/or sustainable cities: Discourse and practices, City, Culture and Society . Volume 4, 125-135.
Redaelli, E. (2011). Analyzing the ‘‘creative city" governance: Relational processes in Columbus, Ohio. City, Culture and Society. Volume 8, Issue 8, 19-21.
Romien, Arie and Jon Jacob Trip. (2009). Key elements of creative city development: an assessment of local policies in Amsterdam and Rotterdam.
Sasajima, H. (2013). From red light district to art district: Creative city projects in Yokohama’s Kogane-cho neighborhood. Cities, 33, 77-85 .
Sasaki, M. (2008). Developing Creative Cities Through Networking. Policy Science Vol, 15 No. 3 p. 54.
Selada, C., Cunha, I., & Tomaz, E. (2011). Creative-based strategies in small cities: A case study approach. Redige,2(2). 79-111.
تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی

مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده
انتشار آنلاین از 01 فروردین 1386