تحلیل نقش هم‌آفرینی در توسعه آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری مطالعه موردی: شهر زنجان

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران

10.22059/jhgr.2025.379939.1008718

چکیده

یکی از رویکردهای اساسی به‌منظور توسعه آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری در مدیریت شهری کارآمد و خلاق، بهره‌گیری از رویکرد هم‌آفرینی است، که هدف آن پرداختن به نیازها و چالش‌های اجتماعی است که در جامعه مدرن به طور فزاینده‌ای تکه‌تکه شده‌اند، و شهروندان از طریق هم‌آفرینی می‌توانند یک شهروندی فعال و سیاسی بر مبنای حقوق و تعهدات به بار آیند. تحقیق حاضر با مدل ساختاری-تفسیری به دنبال تحلیل نقش هم‌آفرینی در توسعه آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری در شهر زنجان است. گردآوری داده‌ها به‌صورت مطالعات پیمایشی و کتابخانه‌ای انجام شد. جامعه آماری شامل 30 نفر نخبگان است که با روش نمونه‌گیری گلوله‌برفی انتخاب شدند. شناسایی شاخص‌های آزمایشگاه زنده شهری با استفاده از نظریه داده بنیاد در قالب مصاحبه نیمه‌ساختاریافته با کمک نرم‌افزار MAXQDA انجام شد. برای تحلیل داده‌ها از مدل معادلات ساختاری به‌صورت تکنیک حداقل مجذور مربع با کمک نرم‌افزار SmartPLS.3 استفاده شد. طبق یافته‌های تحقیق، هم‌آفرینی و آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری رابطه متقابل و معنی‌دار با یکدیگر دارند. ازاین‌رو، مشارکت ذی‌نفعان شهری، می‌تواند نقش مؤثری در ایجاد آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری به‌منظور اجرای طرح‌ها و پروژه‌های عمرانی و زیربنایی در شهر زنجان ایفا کند. همچنین، برای دستیابی به یک مکانیسم منسجم در «هم‌آفرینی پروژه‌های مبتنی بر آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری»، نیازمند تقویت زیرساخت‌های عدالت اجتماعی و اجرای پروژه‌های محیط‌زیست محور هستیم. از طرفی، از طریق تقویت «گفتگو» و «انعطاف‌پذیری» می‌توان، مشارکت و هم‌آفرینی بین ذی‌نفعان پروژه‌های مبتنی بر آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری در شهر زنجان را توسعه داد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of the Role of Co-creation in the Development of Urban Living Laboratories: A case study of Zanjan City

نویسندگان [English]

  • Majid Hazrati
  • MOHAMAD TAGHI heydari
Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Social Sciences, Zanjan University, Zanjan, Iran
چکیده [English]

ABSTRACT
One of the basic approaches in order to develop living urban laboratories in efficient and creative urban management is to use the co-creation approach, which aims to address the needs and social challenges that are increasingly fragmented in modern society, and citizens can become citizens through co-creation. Active and political based on rights and obligations. The current research with the structural-interpretive model seeks to analyze the role of co-creation in developing urban living laboratories in Zanjan city. Data collection was done in the form of surveys and library studies. The statistical population includes 30 elite people who were selected by snowball sampling. The identification of the indicators of the urban living laboratory was done using the foundational data theory in the form of a semi-structured interview with the help of MAXQDA software. The structural equation model was used as the least square technique to analyze the data with the help of SmartPLS.3 software. According to the findings of the research, Co-creation and urban living laboratories have a mutual and meaningful relationship with each other. Therefore, the participation of urban stakeholders can play an effective role in creating living urban laboratories for implementing construction and infrastructure projects in Zanjan city. Also, in order to achieve a coherent mechanism in the "co-creation of projects based on urban living laboratories", we need to strengthen the infrastructure of social justice and the implementation of environment-oriented projects. On the other hand, by strengthening "conversation" and "flexibility", it is possible to develop participation and co-creation among the beneficiaries of projects based on urban living laboratories in Zanjan city.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
In order to become a center for creativity and ideation and generally a living urban laboratory, the creative and innovative city is constantly facing inevitable risks. On the other hand, the urban planning and management system has a plural structure with a distributed decision-making system. Designing and implementing urban projects requires skilled and trained human resources, a collaborative planning system, and stable and focused financial resources. As a result, in order to achieve sustainable financial resources and efficient human resources, the requirement to use the capacities of the private sector is justified. Meanwhile, living labs, as innovation-oriented approaches, try to present and implement ideas from outside sources for the development and commercialization of innovation so that relevant investigations and possible problems can be controlled in the test environments of living labs before widespread exploitation. Surveys showed that the co-creation approach is one of the basic approaches for developing urban living laboratories in efficient and creative urban management. In this regard, citizens can achieve active and political citizenship based on rights and obligations through co-creation. Citizens can see themselves as "builders" of public services and help solve problems by mobilizing forces and ideas that improve their quality of life. Other benefits of co-creation are deep access related to social justice and citizens' rights in the field of involvement in the city.
 
Methodology
The current research with the structural-interpretive model seeks to analyze the role of co-creation in the development of urban living laboratories in Zanjan city. Data collection was done in the form of survey and library studies. The statistical population includes 30 elite people who were selected by snowball sampling. The identification of the indicators of the urban living laboratory was done using the foundational data theory in the form of a semi-structured interview with the help of MAXQDA software. After determining the condition and the main factors through foundational data theory, structural equation modeling has been used. Structural equation modeling has been used after determining the condition and the main factors through foundational data theory. The structural equation model is a family of statistical techniques used to systematically analyze multivariate data to measure theoretical structures (latent variables) and relationships between them. A structural equation model consists of two parts as the first part contains the measurement model that defines the relationship between manifest variables (measured) and latent variables (estimated or factors). The second part also includes the structural model that specifies how the factors are related. In this research, the six variables of urban living laboratories (social justice, productivity, infrastructure, environment, information and communication technology, quality of life) were identified as dependent variables and co-creation as dependent variables.
 
Results and discussion
In order to achieve a coherent theoretical framework in the development of living urban labs, especially in Zanjan city as one of the pilot cities in the development of the IT city in the country, the present study, with the help of the urban co-creation approach, based on the opinions of experts active in this field, proceeded to formulate a research framework. It is coherent and extracts the desired indicators in this field. In this context, the foundation data theory method has been used as thematic analysis using Max Kyuda qualitative software to extract indicators based on the opinions of the statistical community of experts. The output of this method is the extraction of 98 components and 10 categories (6 components of urban living laboratory and 4 components of urban co-creation) from 326 open codes resulting from the analysis of 30 interviews. After extracting the indicators and compiling the questionnaire, the structural equation model was used to achieve a detailed study framework of the role of urban co-creation in the development of living laboratories in Zanjan.
 
 
 
Conclusion
According to the beta coefficient of 1.983, the relationship between co-creation and urban living laboratories is significant, and the participation of urban stakeholders can play an effective role in creating urban living laboratories in order to implement construction and infrastructure projects in Zanjan. In the meantime, the studies showed that the environmental index, with a standard beta coefficient of 16.622, and the social justice structure, with a standard beta coefficient of 16.009, influence urban co-creation. Therefore, in order to achieve a coherent mechanism in the "co-creation of projects based on urban living laboratories", we need to strengthen the infrastructure of social justice and the implementation of environment-oriented projects. On the opposite point, the structure of "conversation," with a coefficient of 3.584, and the structure of flexibility, with a coefficient of 2.759, have the most significant effect on strengthening urban co-creation. By strengthening the aforementioned structures, it is possible to successfully develop participation and co-creation among the beneficiaries of urban projects in Zanjan city.
According to the results of theoretical and qualitative and quantitative findings, in order to strengthen the role of co-creation in the development of urban living laboratories in Zanjan city, the following are suggested:

Sharing the experiences of professors and experts and constructive dialogue with stakeholders in order to prioritize services and inform through social media in order to strengthen urban co-creation and advance the goals of urban living laboratories.
Supporting new and comprehensive urban development ideas and informing stakeholders to participate in idea generation through creating and developing communication networks between citizens and organizations in charge of urban development.
Upgrading and updating collaborative skills through applying multiple skills in challenging situations and adopting appropriate strategies to improve co-creation in order to advance urban development goals in the form of living urban laboratories.
Providing clear, complete and understandable information for all the beneficiaries of urban projects in the context of urban living laboratories.

 
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]

  • Living laboratory
  • Co-Creation
  • Participation
  • Urban Stakeholders
  • Zanjan city
  1. سلیمی، مجتبی. (1402). هم‌آفرینی شهری و عدالت اجتماعی در شهرهای هوشمند. هجدهمین همایش ملی جغرافیا و محیط‌زیست، شیروان.  
  2. شاطریان، محسن؛ سهراب‌زاده، مهران؛ امامعلی‌زاده، حسین و حسینی‌زاده، سعید. (1396). بحران هویّت و انزوای اجتماعی در شهرهای جدید و رابطه آن با رضایت از محل سکونت (مورد مطالعه: شهر جدید پردیس). فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، 8(28)، 111-134. DOI: 20.1001.1.22285229.1396.8.28.7.9
  3. محمدرضاپور، بهروز؛ رفیع‌پور، سعید و علی‌پور، میثم. (1401). بسط مفهومی آزمایشگاه زندۀ شهری بر اساس روش تحلیل مفهوم تکاملی راجرز. اقتصاد و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، 4(1)، 92-114. DOI: 20.1001 .1.28212118.1401 .4.1.6.7
  4. مرکز آمار ایران. (1395). سرشماری عمومی نفوس و مسکن استان زنجان 1395، تهران، انتشارات مرکز آمار ایران.
  5. مقتدایی، لیلا و جمشیدیان، عبدالرسول. (1399). مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری در بررسی رابطه هم‌آفرینی و سرمایه اجتماعی (مورد مطالعه: اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاه اصفهان). نامه آموزش عالی، 13(50)، 67-89.
  6. مکینیان، ارسلان. (1401). مفهوم آزمایشگاه زنده شهری و جایگاه آن در گذار پایدار شهری. نشریه علمی تخصصی شباک، 8(6)، 130-121.
  7. مهدنژاد، حافظ. (1402). فراتحلیل ارائه مدل نظری آزمایشگاه‌های زنده شهری به‌مثابه مدل گذار پایداری. نشریه دانش شهرسازی، 7(3)، 1-20. DOI: 10. 2124/upk.2023.23856.1848
  8. یزدانی، مائده؛ انصاری، مجتبی و پورجعفر، محمدرضا. (1400). آزمایشگاه زنده شهری به‌مثابه روشی برای گذار فرهنگی به معاصرسازی پایدار؛ نمونه موردی: محله جماران. مطالعات نظری و فناوری‌های نوین معماری و شهرسازی. ۱۲ (۱)،۴۰-۲۰. DOI:20.1001.1.23224991.1401.12.1.1.1
  9. یزدی‌زاده، علی؛ توسلی، علی و طبائیان، کمال. (1395). آزمایشگاه زنده، محیطی برای نوآوری‌های مشترک: یک مرور نظام‌مند. مجله رهیافت، 26(62)، 84-73. DOI:20.1001.1.10272690.1395.26.62.5.0
  10. Almirall Mezquita, E., CasadesúsMasanell, R., & Wareham, J. (2021). Understanding Innovation as a Collaborative, Co-Evolutionary Process. Corpus ID: 187268517
  11. Almirall, E., & Casadesus-Masanell, R. (2010). Open versus closed innovation: A model of discovery and divergence. Academy of management review, 35(1), 27-47. DOI:10.5465/amr.35.1.zok27
  12. Bailey, C., & Ngwenyama, I. A. (2020). Theory of Smart Cities, Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the ISSS, Held at University of Hull Business School, UK, July 17-22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228428752_A_Theory_of_Smart_Cities
  13. Brons, A., van der Gaast, K., Awuh, H., Jansma, E.J., Segreto, C., & Wertheim-Heck, S. (2022). A tale of two labs: Rethinking urban living labs for advancing citien engagement in food system transformatins. Citis, 123(3),1035-52. DOI:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103552.
  14. Bronson, K., Devkota, R., & Nguyen, V. (2021). Moving toward Generalizability? A Scoping Review on Measuring the Impact of Living Labs. MDPI, 1(3), 1-16. DOI: 10.3390/su13020502
  15. Erjavec, I.S., & Ruchinskaya, T. (2019). A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness of Public Open Spaces. in Cyberparks, 1(1), 209-224. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_17
  16. Florez Ayala, D.H., Alberton, A., & Ersoy, A. (2022). Urban Living Labs: Pathways of Sustainability Transitions towards Innovative City Systems from a Circular Economy Perspective. Sustainability, 14(9831), 1 -29. DOI:10.1177/09562478241230462
  17. Franz, Y .(2015). Designing social living labs in urban research. Info: The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications. Infor mation and Media, 17(4), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/info-01-2015-0008
  18. Fuglsang, L., & Hansen, A. V. (2022). Framing improvements of public innovatin in a living lab context: Processual learning, restrained space and democrati engagement. Research Policy, 51(1), [104390]. htts://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104390
  19. Hatch, M., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for brand governance. Brand Management, 17(8), 590-604. DOI:10.1057/bm.2010.14
  20. Ind, N., & Coates, N. (2013). The meaning of co-creation. European Businoss Review, 25(1), 86 -95.
  21. Iran Statistics Center (2015), General Population and Housing Census of Zanjan Province 2015. Publications of Iran Statistics Center, Tehran. [In Persian].
  22. Kazman, R., & Chen, H. (2019). The metropolis model: a new logic for development of corwdsourced systems. New York, Communications of The ACM.
  23. Kessls, J. W. M. (2021). Tempting knowledge productivity. Inaugural speech human resources development. University Twenty.
  24. Lupp, G., ZingraffHamed, A., Huang, J.J., Oen, A., & Pauleit, S. (2021). Living Labs-A Concept for Co-Designing. New York, Nature-Bas
  25. Mahdenjad, H. (2023). Meta-analysis of presenting the theoretical model of urban living laboratories as a transition model of sustainability. Danesh Shahr Sazi Journal, 7(3), 1-20.   DOI:10.22124/upk.2023.23856.1848.[In Persian]
  26. Makinian, A. (2022), The concept of urban living laboratory and its place in sustainable urban transition. Shabak specialized scientific journal, 8(6), 121-130. [In Persian]
  27. Mohammadrezapour, B., Rafipour, S., & Alipour, M. (2022). Conceptual expansion of urban living laboratory based on Rogers' method of evolutionary concept analysis. Economics and Urban Planning, 4(1), 92-114.  DOI:20.1001.1.28212118.1401.4.1.6.7.[In Persian]
  28. Moqtadaei, L., & Jamshidian, A. (2019). Structural equation modeling in investigating the relationship between co-creation and social capital (case study: Isfahan University faculty members). Higher Education Letter, 13(50), 67-89.[In Persian]
  29. Nyström, A. G., Leminen, S., Westerlund, M., & Kortelainen, M. (2014). Actor roles and role patterns influencing innovation in living labs. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(3), 483-495. DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.12.016
  30. Pieters, M. & Jansen, S. (2022). The 7 principle of complete cocreation. Amsterdam: BIS publishers.
  31. Porter, M. E. (2010) Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15-34. DOI: 10.1177/ 089124240001 400105
  32. Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K., (2022). The co-creation paradigm. Standford university press, Stanford, California.
  33. Salimi, M. (2023). Urban co-creation and social justice in smart cities. 18th National Conference on Geography and Environment, Shirvan. [In Persian]
  34. Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. G. (2008). Co-creation and the new Landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1), 5-18.  DOI:10.1080/15710880701875068
  35. Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). (2012). Green Networks in Development Planning. https://www.nature.scot/sites/default/fies/2019-10/SNH%20Information%20note%20-%20 Green %20Networks%20in%20Development%20Planning%20-%20March%202012.pdf
  36. Shatrian, M., Sohrabzadeh, M., Imamalizadeh, H., & Hosseinizadeh, S. (2016). Identity crisis and social isolation in new cities and its relationship with satisfaction with the place of residence (case study: Shahr Jadid Pardis). Urban Research and Planning Quarterly, 8(28), 111-134.  DOI:20.1001.1.22285229.1396.8.28.7.9.[In Persian]
  37. Tang, Z., Jayakar, K., Feng, X., Zhang, H., & Peng, R. X. (2019). Identifying smart city archetypes from the bottom up: A content analysis of municipal plans. Telecommunications Policy. Elsevier, 43(10).  DOI:10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101834
  38. Willems, J.J., Kuitert, L., & Van Buuren , A. (2022). Policy integration in urban living labs: Delivering multi-functional blue-green infrastructure in Antwerp, Dordrecht, and Gothenburg. Environmental Policy and Governan, 14(6), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.2028
  39. Yazdani, M., Ansari, M., & Pourjafar, M. R. (2021). Urban living laboratory as a method for cultural transition to sustainable modernization; Case example: Jamaran neighborhood. The role of the world - theoretical studies and new technologies of architecture and urban planning, 2022; 12 (1), 20-40. DOI:20.1001.1.23224991.1401.12.1.1.1.[In Persian]
  40. Yazdizadeh, A., Tavasoli, A., & Tabaian, Kamal. (2015). The living laboratory, an environment for collaborative innovation: a systematic review. Approach, 26(62), 84-73. DOI:20.1001.1.10272690.1395.26.62.5.0.[In Persian]