پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 161 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,532 |
| تعداد مقالات | 70,500 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,085,037 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,189,088 |
آسیب شناسی مدیریت شهری شهر سنندج با رویکرد حکمروایی خوب | ||
| پژوهشهای جغرافیای انسانی | ||
| دوره 56، شماره 3، تیر 1403، صفحه 1-15 اصل مقاله (1 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مستخرج از پایان نامه | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jhgr.2020.123461.1006990 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| کرامت اله زیاری* ؛ حسین حاتمی نژاد؛ امیر شریفی | ||
| گروه جغرافیای انسانی و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| در عصری که شاهد رشد شتابان و پیچیده‌تر شدن شهرها و گسترش بحرانهای شهری هستیم، اعمال حاکمیت و مدیریت به‌صورت یک‌سویه توسط حکومت برای مدیریت جامعه شهری، دیگر مطلوب و جواب‌گو نیست، لذا کاربست راهبردهای تعاملی با جلب همکاری و مشارکت شهروندان و نهادهای مدنی، بیش‌ازپیش ضرورت یافته‌اند. یکی از این کاربستهای پیشنهادی الگوی حکمروایی خوب شهری می‌باشد. این الگو از سوی اغلب سازمانهای بین‌المللی برای اداره شهروندمدارانه شهرهای جهان پیشنهاد شده است. این پژوهش با پی بردن به نیاز شهر سنندج به به‌کارگیری الگوی حکمروایی خوب شهری در این شهر، اقدام به بررسی وضعیت شاخصهای حکمروایی خوب شهری در شهر سنندج نموده است. همچنین به این موضوع پرداخته شده است که عملکرد مدیریت شهری در نواحی مختلف بر اساس الگوی حکمروایی خوب به چه میزان از هم متفاوت میباشند. روش تحقیق در این پژوهش توصیفی تحلیلی می‌باشد. اطلاعات موردنیاز این پژوهش با استفاده از مطالعه کتابخانه‌ای و روش پرسشنامه‌ای به‌دست‌آمده است و برای تحلیل داده‌ها از آزمون‌های تی استیودنت، آنوا و توکی استفاده‌شده است. نتایج این پژوهش بیانگر وضعیت ضعیف شاخصهای حکمروایی خوب شهری در شهر سنندج می‌باشد. با این حال وضعیت شاخص مشارکت نسبت به سایر شاخص ها در جایگاه بهتری قرار دارد و شاخص قانونمندی بصورت نسبی در وضعیت نامناسبی قرار گرفته است. همچنین تفاوت معنیداری بین عملکرد مدیریت شهری شهر سنندج در نواحی مختلف مشاهده‌شده است. بدین معنی که نواحی پیرامونی شهر و همچنین نواحی بخش شمالی شهر دارای جایگاه مطلوبی نمیباشند. در حالی که نواحی بخش جنوبی شهر دارای شرایط نسبتاً مناسبی میباشند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| مدیریت شهری؛ حکمروایی خوب شهری؛ شهرداری؛ شاخصهای حکمروایی؛ سنندج | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Urban Management Pathology of Sanandaj City with Good Governance Approach | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Keramatollah Ziari؛ Hosin Hataminezhad؛ Amir Sharifi | ||
| Department of Human Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Extended Abstract Introduction There are many challenges ahead for municipalities due to the need for a proper definition of their role in the structure of urban management. The private sector and civil society are essential in achieving good governance, and municipalities need better cooperation. This issue has led to the failure of municipalities in terms of management. This problem prevails in most cities in the country. After more than 90 years of municipal activities (Baladieh) and the city council of Sanandaj (Sena), the city has seen many urban management problems today. One of the main factors causing enormous problems in Sanandaj is the spread of a theory and practice gap between the city administration, the private sector, and civil society. This research is based on the assumption that the main cause of management problems in Sanandaj is weakness in the city in terms of urban good governance components (index). Indeed, this study sought to determine the parameters of good governance in Sanandaj to provide a clear understanding of the status index of urban governance in Sanandaj. This study, in contrast to most previous research, considered a full list of indexes of urban good governance. On the other hand, this study sought to assess the situation of the indices for various regions to clarify the differences in the urban management of Sanandaj in different areas. In the case of weaknesses of each of these indicators in Sanandaj, this research helps provide practical solutions. Methodology Defining the aim of the research has a significant impact on research tools and methods. Research methods depend on the research's purpose, nature, and executive facilities. According to the object and purpose of the research, descriptive-analytical methods were used. In order to gain theoretical insight and literature review, the style library was used. Specifically, it was used for books, articles, statutes, and online references. To obtain field information, questionnaire tools with questions in Likert with 5-item options were used. The questionnaires were distributed among the citizens of Sanandaj, including 19 connected zones and 4 separated urban zones. Questionnaires were distributed among citizens by utilizing the simple random distribution method. The questionnaire also included five kinds of options: too much (5), much (4), medium (3), low (2), and very low (1) scores. Additionally, statistical analysis software was used for the data analysis. The statistical population of the research includes all the inhabitants of the city of Sanandaj, which, according to statistical results, includes a total of 373,987 people in the last public census. The Cochran formula is used to determine the sample size. The sample size was 384, and the methods included their choice and stratified sampling. Results and discussion To keep track of the desired goals in this study, eight indices among the good governance indexes proposed by the United Nations have been identified and evaluated. These indicators include transparency, efficiency and effectiveness, social justice, legitimacy, accountability, responsibility, responsiveness, participation, and consensus-orientedness. The T-test was used to evaluate urban management's general performance. In this test, the theoretical values of the index were compared with the mean values of each indicator, and the significance and non-significance of each test were conducted. Indeed, this test aims to compare the indices of urban good governance. The results reflect the poor performance of urban management in Sanandaj based on every eight reviewed indices in the pattern of urban good governance. However, it should also be considered that urban management performance in the eight indicators reviewed was almost at the same level. In the case of the assumption that there are differences between urban good governance indexes in different areas of Sanandaj, the test is significant at 95% confidence, and the H0 assumption is verified. This means there are significant differences between different areas of the city regarding urban good governance indices. According to the results of the Tukey test, there are many differences among the urban good governance indices in Sanandaj city. Four urban zones separated around Sanandaj had the weakest status, and during the last few years, they have been added to the city's law limit. Accordingly, the weakest conditions are related to Naysr, Nanaleh, Grizeh, and the Hassan Abad zone. These four zones, considered generally marginalized city areas, have very poor physical and spatial conditions. As a result, the people of these areas view Sanandaj urban management as the main cause of the backwardness of the area. On the other hand, these areas, with a lack of commitment to the urban rules, regulations, and arrangements, create tense conditions among citizens and municipalities. In terms of urban good governance indicators, four urban districts in Sanandaj had very favorable statuses. These areas are zone 22, zone 20, zone 18, and zone 19. Conclusion By studying the map of the Tukey test in GIS software, important results concerning the spatial analysis of urban good governance in the City of Sanandaj were found. This means that a certain space pattern dominated Sanandaj's urban management. Accordingly, each attached district surrounding the city of Sanandaj (Naysr, Nanaleh, Grizeh, and Hassan Abad Regions) has horrendous conditions. Northern areas (districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6) of Sanandaj city, compared to other inside areas, have a bad situation. Western areas (zones 8, 9, 10, and 11) had moderate conditions of urban management of the city based on the pattern of urban good governance. The southern areas are in a very good state compared to other areas. Funding There is no funding support. Authors’ Contribution Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none. Conflict of Interest Authors declared no conflict of interest. Acknowledgments We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Urban Management, Good Governance, Municipality, Governance Indicators, Sanandaj | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
برک پور، ناصر. (1385). حکمروایی شهری و نظام اداره شهرها در ایران. همایش برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری، 27-1. پاداش، حمید؛ جهانشاهی، بابک و صادقین، علی. (1387). مؤلفه‌ها و شاخصهای حکمروایی شهری، جستارهای شهرسازی، 20 (1)، 79-72. پوراحمد، احمد؛ پیری، اسماعیل؛ محمدی، یادگار؛ پارسا، شهرام و حیدری، سامان. (1397). حکمروایی خوب شهری در محله‌های شهری (مطالعه موردی: شهر مریوان). فصلنامه اقتصاد و مدیریت شهری. ۶ (۲۴)، 98-81. Doi: 20.1001.1.23452870.1397.6.24.6.3 تقوایی، علی‌اکبر و تاجدار، رسول. (1388). درآمدی بر حکمروایی خوب شهری در رویکردی تحلیلی. فصلنامه مدیریت شهری، 43 (1)، 58-45. رفیعیان، مجتبی و حسین‌پور، علی. (1390). حکمرانی خوب شهری از منظر نظرات شهرسازی. تهران: انتشارات طحان. رزمی، محمدجواد و صدیقی، سمیه. (1391). الزامات تحقق حکمرانی خوب برای دستیابی به توسعه انسانی. چهارمین همایش ملی اقتصاد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد خمینی‌شهر، پاییز سال 1391. شهیدی، محمدحسین. (1386). شهرسازی، حمل‌ونقل و حکمروایی شهری. جستارهای شهرسازی، شماره 20 (1)، 44-38. صادقی، مجتبی و رهنما، محمدرحیم. (1392). تبیین ساختاری-کارکردی مدیریت مشارکتی شهری، مطالعه موردی شهر مشهد. پژوهشهای جغرافیای انسانی، 45 (1)، 184-169. صرافی، مظفر. (1380). ابر مسئله شهری ایران و نقش برنامه‌ریزان شهری. فصلنامه معماری و شهرسازی، 62 (3)، 50-45. صرافی، مظفر و عبدالهی، مجید. (1387). تحلیل مفهوم شهروندی و ارزیابی جایگاه آن در قوانین، مقررات و مدیریت شهری. پژوهشهای جغرافیایی، 63 (1)، 134-115. عسکری زاده اردستانی، سهیلا؛ ضرابی اصغر و تقوایی، مسعود. (1398). بررسی وضعیت شاخصهای حکمروایی خوب شهری در شهر اراک. جغرافیا و توسعه ناحیه‌ای، 16(1)، 335-309. Doi: 10.22067/geography.v16i1.74544 کاظمیان، غلامرضا. (1386). درآمدی بر الگوی حکمروایی شهری، جستارهای شهرسازی، 20 (1)، 7-5. محمودی، محمد. (1392). راهنمای گردشگری در استان‌های کردنشین. جلد اول، استان کردستان، سنندج: انتشارات کردستان. مکرونی، گلایول و مکرونی، گلاله. (1392). ارزیابی سطح پایداری شهری با استفاده از مدل AHP، نمونه موردی شهر سنندج. نخستین همایش ملی مدیریت یکپارچه شهری و نقش آن در توسعه پایدار شهری، سنندج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد سنندج، صص 11-1. نصیری، آرمان و ریاضی، فیاض. (1391). بررسی شاخصهای حکمروایی خوب شهری، نمونه موردی شهر سنندج، مجموعه مقالات نخستین همایش علمی حکمروایی خوب شهری، جلد نخست، تهران: انتشارات تیسا. مرکز آمار ایران. (1390). سرشماری عمومی نفوس و مسکن شهرستان سنندج. مرکز آمار ایران. (1395). سرشماری عمومی نفوس و مسکن شهرستان سنندج. مشکینی، ابوالفضل؛ ربانی، طاها؛ رکن‌الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا و رفیعیان، مجتبی. (1398). آینده‌نگاری حکمروایی، بسط مفهوم و آینده حکمروایی کلان‌شهر تهران. پژوهشهای جغرافیای برنامه‌ریزی شهری، 7 (3)، 453-431. Doi: 10.22059/JURBANGEO.2019.241191.778
References Abdellatif, M. (2003). Good governance and its relationship to democracy and economic development. In Global Forum III on Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity. Presented for the Regional Bureau for Arab States, UNCDP, seoul. Ahmed, I. (1999). Governance and the international development community: Making sense of the Bangladesh experience. Contemporary South Asia 8 (3), 295-309. Doi: 10.1080/09584939908719870 Askarizadeh, S., Zarabi, A., & Taghvaei, M. (2018). Examining the Status of Good Urban Governance Indicators in Arak City. Journal of Geography and Regional Development, 16(1), 309-335. [In Persian]. Badach, J., & Dymnicka, M. (2018). Concept of ‘Good Urban Governance’and Its Application in Sustainable Urban Planning. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 245, No. 8, p. 082017). IOP Publishing. Doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/245/8/082017 Bajracharya, B. & Khan, S. (2020). Urban governance in Australia: a case study of Brisbane City. In New Urban Agenda in Asia-Pacific (pp. 225-250). Springer, Singapore. Doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-6709-0_8 Barakpur, N. (2006). Urban Governance and Management System of Cities in Iran. Conference on urban planning management. [In Persian]. Bevir, M. (2010). Democratic governance. Princeton University Press. Doi: 10.1177/09520767124614 Biswas, R., Jana, A., Arya, K., & Ramamritham, K. (2019). A good-governance framework for urban management. Journal of Urban Management, 8(2), 225-236. Doi: 10.1016/j.jum.2018.12.009 Bontenbal, Marike C. (2009). Strengthening urban governance in the South through city-to- city cooperation: Towards an analytical framework. Habitat International 33 (2), 181-189. Doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2008.10.016 Chatwin, M., & Arku, G. (2019). Smart and Open Urban Governance in Africa. In Smart Economy in Smart African Cities (pp. 371-392). Springer, Singapore. Doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-3471-9_12 Cheema, G. S. (Ed.). (2013). Democratic local governance: reforms and Innovations in Asia. United Nations University Press. Cheema, G. S., & Popovski, V. (2010). Building trust in government: innovations in governance reform in Asia. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. Dahiya B. (2015). World urban realities. Magazine for Architecture and Urban Planning—DaNS, 19 Feb.http://www.dans.org.rs/index.php?option=com_content& task=view&id=660&Itemid=52. Accessed 21 May 2015 Dahiya, B., & Das, A. (2020). New Urban Agenda in Asia-Pacific: governance for sustainable and inclusive cities. In New Urban Agenda in Asia-Pacific (pp. 3-36). Springer, Singapore. Doi:10.1007/978-981-13-6709-0_1 Doi: 10.22067/geography.v16i1.74544 Frantzeskaki, N., Wittmayer, J., & Loorbach, D. (2014). The role of partnerships in ‘realising’urban sustainability in Rotterdam's City Ports Area, The Netherlands. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 406-417. Doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.09.023 Gani, A. & and Ron, D. (2007). Measuring good governance using time series data: Fiji Islands. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy 12 (3), 367-385. Doi: 10.1080/13547860701405979 Gore, T. & and Wells, P. (2009). Governance and evaluation: the case of EU regional policy horizontal priorities, Evaluation and program, 32(2), 158-167. DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.10.007 Habitat III (2017). Issue Papers report, United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, Quito, Ecuador. Hendriks, F. (2014). Understanding good urban governance: Essentials, shifts, and values. Urban Affairs Review, 50(4), 553-576. Doi: 10.1177/1078087413511782 Iran Statistics Center (2015). General population and housing census of Sanandaj city. [In Persian]. Iran Statistics Center (2018). General population and housing census of Sanandaj city. [In Persian]. Kazemian, G. (1386). An introduction to the model of urban governance. Urbanization Essays, 19 /20, 5-7. [In Persian]. Mahmoudi, M. (2012). Tourism Guide in Kurds Provinces. first volume, Kurdistan Province, Kurdistan Publications, Sanandaj. [In Persian]. Makroni, G. & Makroni, G. (2012). Assessing the level of urban sustainability using the AHP model, a case study of the city of Sanandaj, the first national conference on integrated urban management and its role in sustainable urban development, Sanandaj, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj branch, pp. 1-11. [In Persian]. Mccall, M. (2003). Seeking good governance in participatory- GIS: a review of processes and governance dimentions in applying GIS to participatory spatial planning. Habitat International. 27 (4):549- 573. Doi: 10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00005-5 Meshkini, A., Rabbani, T., Eftehkari, A., & Rafieian, M. (2019). Governance Foresight, a Concept Development and Future of Tehran Metropolitan Governance. Geographical Urban Planning Research, 7(3), 431-453. doi: 10.22059/jurbangeo.2019.241191.778. [in Persian]. Morgan, M. (2003). Enveronmental Health. Canada: Wadsworth. Murphy, P. (2007). The metropolis. Planning Australia: An Overview of Urban and Regional Planning, 155-179. Nasiri, A. & Riazi, F. (2012). Investigating the indicators of good urban governance, a case study of Sanandaj city. collection of articles of the first scientific conference on good urban governance, first volume, Tehran: Tisa Publishing House. [in Persian]. Padash. H., Jahanshahi, B, & Sadeghin, A., (2007). Criteria and Indicators of Urban Governance. Journal of jostarhaye shahrsazi, 19- 20, 72- 80. [in Persian]. Pierre, J. (2011). The politics of urban governance. Macmillan International Higher Education. Poorahmad, A., Piri, E., Mohammadi, Y., Parsa S. & Heydari S. (2018). Good Urban Governance in Urban Neighborhoods (Case: Marivan City), 6 (24),81-98. Doi: 20.1001.1.23452870.1397.6.24.6.3 [in Persian]. Rafieian. M., & Hoseinpour. A. (2012). Theory, City, Space, Urban Management. Tehran: Tahan Publication. [in Persian]. Razmi, M. & Sediqi, S. (2012). Requirements for the realization of good governance to achieve human development, 4th National Economic Conference, Islamic Azad University, Khomeini Shahr Branch, fall of 2011. [in Persian]. Rhodes, R. (2007). Understanding governance: Ten years on. Organization studies, 28(8), 1243-1264. Doi: 10.1177/0170840607076586 Roberts, S., Wright, S., & O’Neill, P. (2007). "Good governance in the Pacific? Ambivalence and possibility. Geoforum, 38 (5): 967-984. Doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.04.003 Sadashiva, M. )2007(. Effects of civil society on urban planning and governance in Mysore, India." PhD Thiess. Technical University of Dortmund. Doi:10.17877/DE290R-8826 Sadeghi, M., & Rahnama, M. R. (2013). Structural - Functional Explanation of Urban Participative Management (Case Study: Mashhad). Human Geography Research, 45(1), 169-184. doi: 10.22059/jhgr.2013.30044. [in Persian]. Sarafi, M. (2001). Iran's urban mega-problem and the role of urban planners. Architecture and Urban Development Quarterly, 62-63, 45-50. [in Persian]. Sarrafi, M. & Abdullahi, M. (2008). Analysis of the Citizenship Concept and Evaluating Its Position in the Country's Laws, Regulations and Urban Management. Journal of Geographical Research, 40 (63), 115-134. [in Persian]. Shahidi, M. (2007). Urban Planning, Transportation and Urban Governance. Jostarhaye Shahrsazi Quarterly, 6 (19-20). [in Persian]. Sridhar, K. S., Gadgil, R., & Dhingra, C. (2020). Good Governance in the Transparency, Accountability, Public Participation and Capacity (TAP-C) Framework. In Paving the Way for Better Governance in Urban Transport. Springer, Singapore. Doi:10.1007/978-981-13-9620-5_1 Stewart, K. (2006). Designing good urban governance indicators: The importance of citizen participation and its evaluation in Greater Vancouver. Cities, 23(3), 196-204. Doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2006.03.003 Suzor, N. (2018). Digital constitutionalism: Using the rule of law to evaluate the legitimacy of governance by platforms. Social Media Society, 4(3), 2056305118787812. Doi: 10.1177/20563051187878 Taghvayi, A. & Tajdar, A. (2009). Introduction to Good Urban Governance in the Analytical Approach, Urban Management Quarterly, 23. [in Persian]. Tomaževič, N. (2019). Social Responsibility and Consensus Orientation in Public Governance: a Content Analysis. Central European Public Administration Review, 17(2), 189-204. Doi:10.17573/cepar.2019.2.09 Tsou, K-W., Yu-Ting, H., & Yao-Lin, Ch. (2005). An accessibility-based integrated measure of relative spatial equity in urban public facilities. Cities, 22 (6), 424-435. Doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2005.07.004 UN HABITAT, For a better urban future [Internet], [cited 2017 Apr], available from: http://mirror.unhabitat.org/content.asp?typeid=19&catid=25&cid=2097 UNDP (2002). "Introducing Good Local Governance: the Indonesian Experience." UNDP/Governance Unit Jakarta [online]. Accessed June 06 of 2015. http://portal.publicpolicy.utoronto.ca/en/StudyReports/UNDP/IntroducingGoodLocalGovernance The Indonesian Experience/ Pages/ default.aspx. UN-Habitat (2016b). World cities report 2016—urbanization and development: emerging futures. UN-Habitat, Nairobi United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG). (2015). Assessing the institutional environment of local governments in Africa. A report. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-10079-7_1 United Nations (2017). The new urban agenda, A/RES/71/256, Habitat III and United Nations United Nations (2018). Sustainable Development Goal 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg11. Accessed 2 Jan 2018. United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) (2007). State of the world population 2007: unleashing the potential of urban growth, New York United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. A/RES/70/1.https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/ publication. Accessed 5 July 2017. UNPD—United Nations, Population Division (2018). World urbanization prospects: the 2018 revision. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, Online Edition, https://population.un.org/wup/ Van den Dool, L., Hendriks, F., Gianoli, A., & Schaap, L. (2015). The quest for good urban governance: Theoretical reflections and international practices. Springer. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 248 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 382 |
||