تحلیل ساختاری محرک‌های مؤثر بر وضعیت آینده توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه در شهر تهران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری شهرسازی، گروه شهرسازی، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران.

2 استاد، دانشکده شهرسازی، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده
شهرها کانون اندیشه، رقابت و رشد در سرتاسر جهان هستند. توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه از ابعاد کاربردی توسعه پایدار است که امروزه گره‌گشای مشکلات شهری است. شهر دانش‌پایه خروجی توسعه شهر دانش‌پایه، شهری مبتنی بر اقتصاد منطقه‌ای دانش‌پایه با صادرات با ارزش‌افزوده بالا که از طریق تحقیق، فناوری و قدرت فکری ایجاد و برای تشویق و تقویت دانش طراحی ‌شده است. هدف از این پژوهش شناخت و تحلیل محرک‌های توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه در کلان‌شهر تهران می‌باشد. پژوهش حاضر توصیفی- تحلیلی بوده و به لحاظ هدف، کاربردی می‌باشد. محرک‌ها مؤثر از طریق تحلیل محتوی کیفی استخراج و با روش دلفی توسط 20 متخصص غربال‌گری و در سه مرحله با ماتریس دوسویه، در 9بعد و 43 شاخص امتیازدهی شده و از روش تحلیل ساختاری با نرم‌افزار MicMac بر پایه روش تحلیل اثرات متقاطع مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت و در ادامه اثرات مستقیم و غیرمستقیم این محرک‌ها بر آینده توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه در شهر تهران مشخص شد. از میان متغیرهای بررسی ‌شده بیشترین متغیرهای مؤثر شناسایی‌شده، متغیر مدیریت بازار محور از بعد زیرساخت سیاسی با میزان تأثیرگذاری مستقیم 408 در جایگاه اول، متغیر تقویت سرمایه انسانی از بعد زیرساخت انسانی با میزان تأثیرگذاری مستقیم 400 در جایگاه دوم و متغیرهای مدیران دانشی و یکپارچه‌سازی فعالیت‌های سیاسی از بعد زیرساخت سیاسی با میزان تأثیرگذاری مستقیم 361 در جایگاه سوم، متغیر یکپارچه‌سازی فعالیت‌های سیاسی از زیرساخت سیاسی با میزان تأثیرگذاری مستقیم 361 در جایگاه چهارم و متغیر کیفیت اجتماعی از زیرساخت انسانی با تأثیرگذاری مستقیم 356 در جایگاه پنجم قرار گرفتند. به‌این‌ترتیب محرک‌های مؤثر در توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه در شهر تهران در ابتدا زیرساخت سیاسی و بعد زیرساخت انسانی می باشد. در نهایت می‌توان اشاره کرد که شهر تهران هنوز شرایط لازم برای رسیدن به شهر دانش‌پایه را ندارد زیرا هنوز توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه در این شهر شکل نگرفته است.

چکیده تصویری

تحلیل ساختاری محرک‌های مؤثر بر وضعیت آینده توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه در شهر تهران

تازه های تحقیق

- برای اولین بار در این مقاله از طریق تحلیل محتوای کیفی به جمع‌بندی مولفه‌ها و شاخص‌های توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه پرداخته شده، امری که تا به امروز در ایران انجام نشده است.
- یکی از دستاوردهای این مقاله یافتن معیارهای توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه می‌باشد که هم از طریق تحلیل محتوا و هم جمع‌بندی نظرات متخصصین غربالگری و درادامه از نرم‌افزار میک‌مک استفاده شد، بدست آمده است.
- در این مقاله برای اولین بار از این تعداد از شاخص‌ها در رابطه با توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه مطرح شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله English

Structural analysis of drivers affecting the future of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran

نویسندگان English

Masoome Jafari 1
Manouchehr Tabibian 2
1 Ph.D. in Urban Planning, Department of Urban Planning, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran.
2 Professor, Faculty of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده English

Extended Abstract
Background and Objectives: Cities worldwide serve as hubs of thought, competition, and growth. Knowledge-based urban development (KBUD) is a practical facet of sustainable development, addressing contemporary urban challenges. A knowledge-based city, the result of KBUD, thrives on a knowledge-driven regional economy with high value-added exports, created by research, technology, and intellectual capital and designed to encourage and strengthen knowledge. This study aims to identify and analyze the drivers of KBUD in the metropolis of Tehran.
Methods: The current study is a descriptive-analytical research and considered a practical research in terms of purpose. Key drivers were identified through qualitative content analysis using the Delphi method, which involves multiple rounds of expert surveys. In this method, the survey is conducted over two or more rounds, with the results of the first round provided to participants in the second round, allowing them to revise their initial evaluations or add to their previous comments if desired. The Delphi method in this research was evaluated by 20 expert screeners in three stages using a two-way matrix, covering 9 dimensions and 43 indicators. The structural analysis followed four stages: initial discovery, probabilistic stage, integration stage, and implementation stage, utilising MicMac software. Cross-effects analysis was used to determine the direct and indirect impacts of these drivers on the future of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran. It is important to note that analysing these systems is more complex than stable systems due to the involvement of multiple factors. These factors are categorised into five groups: 1) Determining or influencing factors; 2) Two-faceted factors, further divided into risk and target subgroups; 3) Influential factors, representing system outcomes; 4) Independent factors, which are split into discrete and secondary leverage factors; and 5) Regulatory factors.
Findings: After analysing the perspectives of experts over three different decades and studying the experiences of various cities and countries in both theory and practice, as well as examining urban development patterns, the criteria were evaluated qualitatively. This analysis relied on the consensus of 20 urban experts, including professors, managers, and specialists in the field, derived from the Delphi method. The criteria encompassed physical, human, technological, communication, planning, political, educational and research, cultural, and infrastructure factors. In physical infrastructure, sub-criteria included a coordinated approach to building, physical form, and urban structure. In human infrastructure, the experts highlighted enhancing the skills of residents and employees, social order, social quality, highly skilled organizations, strengthening human capital, social justice, knowledge worker overflow, and motivating population knowledge. For technical infrastructure, sub-criteria like technical capacity, technological knowledge, technology dissemination, and knowledge-enabling technologies were identified. In communication infrastructure, criteria such as communication and transportation, strong spatial relationships, accessibility, and connectivity emerged.In strategy and planning infrastructure, sub-criteria included knowledge policies, city management planning, people-centered planning, coordination between public and private sectors, quality administrative environments, and local planning. In political infrastructure, key sub-criteria were social participation, market-oriented management, transparent policymaking, political activity integration, active society, knowledge managers, and equality. Cultural infrastructure involved sub-criteria like cultural institutions, cultural diversity, and communication. Lastly, in educational and research infrastructure, expanding and systematizing research capabilities, educational innovation, and triple helix communication (government, private sector, and university) were emphasized, while location infrastructure highlighted location quality, fairness, permeability, and proximity. Among the variables analyzed, the most influential were: market-oriented management from political infrastructure with a direct impact of 408 (ranked first); human capital strengthening from human infrastructure with a direct impact of 400 (ranked second); and knowledge managers and integration of political activities from political infrastructure, both with a direct impact of 361 (ranked third). Additionally, the integration of political activities (political infrastructure) had a direct impact of 361 (fourth place), and social quality from human infrastructure had a direct impact of 356 (fifth place).
Conclusion: The study concluded that political and human infrastructures are the most influential factors in KBUD in Tehran. Drivers like market-oriented management, human capital strengthening, and integration of political activities have a significant impact. Strengthening these drivers can help overcome social barriers and create opportunities despite resource limitations. In a knowledge-based city or region, the government’s focus is on providing the necessary infrastructure for knowledge-based development, which, unfortunately, has not yet been achieved in Tehran. The lack of an integrated approach to knowledge-based urban development is a significant challenge for countries seeking progress but still outside the development loop, and this confusion in urban management is evident in Tehran. In this context, the government’s role in policymaking and developing infrastructure to support knowledge-based activities is crucial. KBUD heavily relies on human intellect, making education and the training of skilled human resources essential. An effective and efficient educational system that continually enhances knowledge at all levels is necessary for this. To realize knowledge-based urban development, in addition to producing and distributing knowledge, it is vital to focus on applying knowledge effectively to expand capacities and improve resource utilization, which is key to creating a knowledge-based city. The expansion and specialization of labor have boosted market efficiency and productivity, driving technological economic growth and increasing the interdependence of people.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Development
Knowledge-Based Urban Development
Knowledge City
Tehran

 این مقاله برگرفته از رساله دکتری نویسنده نخست با عنوان «ارائه چارچوب مفهومی خلاقیت و نوآوری شهری با رویکرد توسعه شهری دانش‌پایه، مقایسه سه شهر ایران» می‌باشد که به راهنمایی نویسنده دوم در دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد قزوین انجام گرفته است.

This article is derived from the first author`s doctoral thesis entitled “Providing a conceptual framework of urban creativity and innovation in the process of knowledge-based urban development (KBUD), Case study: Comparison of three cities in Iran”, supervised by the second author, at Islamic Azad University, Qazvin branch.

  1. Alrauof, A (2018). The Inevitability of KBUD in the Middle East. Book. Qatar
  2. Antti, Yigitcanlar, Salonius (2015). Analysis of a city-region from the knowledge perspective: Tampere, Finland Emerald insight journal.
  3. Benneworth, P (2014). Reframing the Role of Knowledge Parks and Science Cities in Knowledge-Based Urban Development’.32:784-808.
  4. Chang, D (2018). ‘Knowledge-Based, Smart and Sustainable Cities : A Provocation for a Conceptual Framework, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity
  5. Esmaeilpoorarabi, N &Yigitcanlar,T & Guaralda,M, (2018), ‘Evaluating Place Quality in Innovation Districts : A Delphic Hierarchy Process Approach’ Land Use Policy.1-16
  6. Ergazakis, K, Metaxiotis,K and Psarras, J (2008). ‘Knowledge Cities: The Answer to the Needs of Knowledge-Based Development’. Vine (1) 36:67-84.
  7. Fachinelli, A, Cristina (2018). ‘The Value Context in Knowledge-Based Development : Revealing the Context Factors in the Development of Southern Brazils Vale Dos Vinhedos Region’. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 8238:1-10.
  8. Jomehpour, M, Issa Lou, Sh, Goodarzi, V, Dosti Sabzi, B, (2016), Development of Urban Development Strategies with Knowledge-Based Development Approach (Case Study: Arak Industrial City), Quarterly Journal of Economics and Management Urban, 5 (4) (20 consecutive), 53-65.
  9. Johnston, Andrew, and Robert Huggins, (2016), ‘The Spatio-Relational Nature of Urban Innovation Systems : Universities, Knowledge Intensive Business Service Firms , and Collaborative Networks The Spatio-Relational Nature of Urban Innovation’.
  10. Huston, S, Warren,C,  (2013). ‘Knowledge City and Urban Economic Resilience’. Journal of Property Investment and Finance (1) 31:78-88.
  11. Hermet, P,(2015), Framing knowledge-based urban development and absorptive capacity of urban regions: a case-study of Limburg, the Netherlands, Int. J. Knowledge-Based Development, Vol. 6, No. 4
  12. Rittgasszer, I.,( 2013), Knowledge-Based Urban Development , as a New Development Paradigm’. Regional Growth, Development and Competitiveness : 36–46.
  13. Sarimin, M, Yigitcanlar, T, Parker, Rachel (2010), Towards a unified method for the knowledge based urban development framework.16-30.
  14. Structural Strategic Plan for Development and Civil of Tehran Municipality, (2005), Tehran, Iran, 7.
  15. Village, G. Pancholi, S. Yigitcanlar, T and Guaralda, M (2015). Public Space Design of Knowledge and Innovation Spaces: Learnings from Kelvin. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity: 1-17.
  16. Yigitcanlar, T., Bulu, M., (2015), Dubaization of istanbul. Environ. Plann. A 47, 89–107.
  17. Yigitcanlar,Tan,(2018),‘smart city,knowledge city,sustainable city’. 9(1): 1–5.
  18. Yigitcanlar,T & Esmaeilpoorarabi , N(2016), ‘Towards an Urban Quality Framework : Determining Critical Measures for Different Geographical Scales to Attract and Retain Talent in Cities. 7(3): 290–312.
  19. Yigitcanlar,Tan, (2017), ‘Dubaization of Istanbul : Insights from the Knowledge- Based Urban Development Journey of an Emerging Local Economy’. 47: 89–107.
  20. Yigitcanlara,T, Adu-McViea,R,  rol,I (2020), How can contemporary innovation districts be classified? A systematic review of the literature, Land Use Policy 95 (2020) 104595.  
  21. Yigitcanlar, T and Sarimin, M (2015). QUT Digital Repository : Orchestrating Knowledge ­ Based Urban Development : Lessons from Multimedia Super Corridor, Malaysia: 281–95..
  22. Yigitcanlar, T (2010). Making Space and Place for the Knowledge Economy : Knowledge-Based Development of Australian Cities Making Space and Place for the Knowledge Economy : Knowledge-Based Development of Australian Cities: 37–41
  23. Yigitcanlar,T,Edvardsson,I, Johannesson,H,Kamruzzaman,M, Ioppolo,G, Pancholi,S ,(2017), Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns, European Planning Studies, DOI:10.1080/09654313.2017.1358699.
  24. Yigitcanlar,Tan, (2016), ‘Dubaization of Istanbul : Insights from the Knowledge- Based Urban Development Journey of an Emerging Local Economy’. 47: 89–107.
  25. Yigitcanlar, T, Guaralda,M, Taboada,M, Pancholi,S., (2016), ‘Brisbane's Knowledge Community Precincts, Journal of Urban Technology, 23:1, 115-146.

فایل‌های تکمیلی/اضافی

  • تاریخ دریافت 18 آبان 1400
  • تاریخ بازنگری 04 بهمن 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش 03 اسفند 1400