Assess the implementation of good urban governance in Iran (Case Study: Ilam city)

Document Type : Research Paper



Eextended Abstract
"Good Urban Governance" can be defined as the way and procedure of handling city affairs with the cooperation and engagement of three sections, public, private and civilized society. Regarding the studied factors and practical nature of study, descriptive- explanative method is used. Data are collected with library and field studies. This study aims to evaluate 14 Area of Ilam based on Good Urban Governance criteria. Geographical range of the study is Ilam city whish has a population of 172213 in 1390. Statistical population of the study is 42613 families living in Ilam and case study is 397 head of families who are chosen based on Cochran formula and random sampling. Kronbach Alpha is used for assessing the reliability of the questionnaire which is .86. Seven factors, cooperation, accountability, responsibility, law abidance, justice, transparency and efficiency are analyzed using T-test. Analyzing date, SPSS software and one sample T-test are used. Likert scale is used to evaluate variables. Results show that the levels of all City Good Governance scales are lower than average of Likert scale based on T-test.
The international community, urban management has concluded that the major problem of lack of financial resources and modern technology and skilled manpower is not but before and above all, the main problem is in the method of administration of these agents. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and co- operative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest. Good urban governance, based on the principle of urban citizenship, affirms that no man, woman or child can be denied access to the necessities of urban life, including adequate shelter, security of tenure, safe water, sanitation, a clean environment, health, education and nutrition, employment and public safety and mobility. Therefore todays a procedure which is considered to be the most effective, the least expensive and the most constant is "Good Urban Governance". It can be defined as a procedure of managing municipal activities with cooperation and engagement of three sectors; public, private and civilized society in order to create a sound city with high level of living capabilities and constant development. "Good Urban Governance" must have seven characteristics as follow: 1. Accountability 2.Transparence 3.Cooperation 4. Justice and involvement 5. Comprehensiveness 6. Efficiency and effectiveness
This study is a descriptive- explanative one regarding studying factors and practical nature of the study. Data and information are collected with library and field studies. It is a survey study and it is done by preparing a questionnaire. Statistical population is 42613 Ilamian families and case study is 397 head of families whom are selected by Cochran formula and random sampling. Cronbach's coefficient alpha is used for reliability of questionnaire which is 0.86. Analyzing data is done by T-test method. The aim of the study is evaluating Ilam 14 areas about Good Urban Governance indexes. Geographical limit of the study is Ilam city. Its population was 172213 people and 42613 families in 1390. Participants in the study are 397 people; 297 men and 100 women. Regarding age distribution of the participants, 31 percent are under 30 years old, 36 percent 30 to 45, 22 percent 45 to 60 and 11 percent 60 or more. 45 percent have diploma degrees, 20 percent associate degrees, and 35 percent bachelor and higher degrees. 16 percent are unemployed, 27 percent have governmental jobs, 30 percent are self employed and 22 percent have other jobs. Criteria of this study are World Bank criteria and United Nation developing program. Seven factors, cooperation, accountability, responsibility, law abidance, justice, transparency and efficiency are analyzed using T-test.
Results and discussion
Results show that rate of accountability is -8.340 which is meaningful in 5 percent error level. It can be said that there is a meaningful difference between real average (2.08) and imagined average (3). As the real average is lower than imagined one it can be said that from citizens' views accountability index is in an undesirable level and they evaluate it lower than Likert scale. There is a meaningful difference between real average (2.14) and imagined average (3) for responsibility level and as it is below Likert scale therefore it is in a lower level. Average for law abidance is 3.54 which is more than imagined average. Therefore the level of law abidance is high according to citizens' view. For measuring the level of cooperation, there is a meaningful difference between real (2.06) and imagined (3). Although citizens are eager to improve living condition but because of low level of assigning services to people and not caring about people opinions, they do not cooperate in urban governance. There is a meaningful difference between gained average (2.21) and imagined one (3) for transparency level and as gained one is lower than imagined, it can be said that transparency level is not satisfactory from people viewpoint. There is a meaningful difference between real average of 2.54 and imagined of 3 for justice level. People think that justice level is not in a good condition. There is a meaningful difference for effectiveness and efficiency averages and it shows that people think that they are not in a good condition. Seven factors; cooperation, responsibility, accountability, law abidance, justice, transparence and affectivity are used. Analyzing date, SPSS software and one sample T-test are used. Likert scale is used to evaluate variables. Results show that the levels of all City Good Governance scales are lower than average of Likert scale based on T-test. Therefore it can be said that Ilam 14 areas has undesirable levels according to these scales and the hypothesis of this study is confirmed.


Main Subjects

1. ابراهیم‌زاده، عیسی و مرتضی اسدیان،  تحلیل و ارزیابی میزان تحقق‌پذیری حکمروایی خوب شهری در ایران مورد شناسی: شهر کاشمر، جغرافیا و آمایش شهری–منطقه‌ای، 1392، شمارة 6 ، ص 21.
1.  Ebrahimzadeh, I. and Asadi, M., 1392, Analyze and evaluate the implementation of urban good governance in the Iranian city of Kashmar, Geography and Urban Planning - Regional, Vol. 6, No. 6, PP 21. (In Persian)
2. برک‌پور، ناصر و ایرج اسدی، 1387، نظریه‌های مدیریت و حکمروایی شهری، انتشارات معاونت پژوهشی، دانشگاه هنر تهران.
2.  Burke Pour, N. and Asadi, I., 1387, Theory of management and urban governance, Publications Research Center, Tehran University of Arts. (In Persian)
3. برک‌پور، ناصر، 1388، حکمروایی شهری و نظام ادارۀ شهرها در ایران، مجموعه مقالات کنفرانس برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری.
3. Burke Pour, N., 1388, Urban governance and urban management system in Iran, Planning and Urban Management Conference Proceedings. (In Persian)
4. پاتر، رابرت و دیگران، 1384، شهر در جهان در حال توسعه، ترجمة کیومرث ایراندوست و دیگران، انتشارات سازمان شهرداری‌ها و دهیاری‌های کشور.
4.  Potter,Robert  et al., 1384, City in the developing world, Translated by: Irandoost, K. et al., Publishing Organization and Administers the Country's Municipalities. (In Persian)
5. تقوایی، علی‌اکبر و رسول تاجدار، 1388، درآمدی بر حکمروایی خوب شهری در رویکرد تحلیلی، فصلنامۀ مدیریت شهری، شمارة 23، صص 52-53.
5. Taghvaee, A. and Tajdar, R., 1388, Introduction to urban good governance analytical approach, Journal of Urban Management, Vol. 23, No. 23, PP. 52-53. (In Persian)
6. ترابی، علیرضا،  مدیریت پایدار شهری در گرو حکمروایی خوب، نشریه شهرداری‌ها، تهران، سال 1383،شمارة 69، صص 6.
6. Torabi, A, Sustainable management depends on good governance, Municipal Publications, Tehran,1383 , Vol. 23, No. 69, PP.6. (In Persian)
7. شریفیان ثانی، مریم،  مشارکت شهروندی، حکمرانی شهری و مدیریت شهری، فصلنامة مدیریت شهری، سال 1380، شمارة 8 ، صص 149.
7. Sharifian Sani, M. , Citizen participation, urban governance and urban management, Urban Management Journal,1380,  Vol.8, No. 8, PP.149. (In Persian)
8. سعیدنیا، احمد، 1383، مدیریت شهری، جلد یازدهم، انتشارات سازمان شهرداری‌ها و دهیاری‌ها، تهران.
8. Saiedniya, A., 1383, Urban Management, Vol. 11, Organization of Municipalities and Dehyariha, Tehran. (In Persian)
9. شکوهی، محمداجزا و میترا مومنی، 1392، بررسی میزان آگاهی شهروندان از خدمات‌رسانی شهرداری و تأثیر آن بر مشارکت در محلۀ هاشمیۀ شهر مشهد، اولین همایش ملی جغرافیا، شهرسازی و توسعة پایدار، تهران.
9. Shekohi, M. A. and Momeni, M., 1392, To evaluate the awareness of the citizens of the municipality and its impact on participation in community service Hashemite city of Mashhad, 1st National Conference on Geography, Urban Planning and Sustainable Development, Tehran. (In Persian)
10. صرافی، مظفر، 1382، بازنگری ویژگی‌های اسکان خودانگیخته در ایران، در جستجوی راهکارهای توانمندسازی، مجموعه مقالات حاشیه‌نشینی و اسکان غیررسمی، جلد اول، انتشارات دانشگاه علوم بهزیستی و توانبخشی.
10. Sarrafi, M., 1382, Reviewing the characteristics of spontaneous settlements in Iran, In Search of Empowerment Strategies, Proceedings of Suburbia and Informal Settlements, Vol. 1, University of Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences. (In Persian)
11. کاظمیان، غلامرضا،  درآمدی بر الگوی حکمرانی شهری، فصلنامۀ جستارهای شهرسازی، سال 1386، شمارة 19-20.
11. Kazemian, G., Introduction to the pattern of urban governance, Urban Queries Journal,1386,  No. 20-19. (In Persian)
12. مرکز آمار ایران، 1390، سرشماری عمومی نفوس و مسکن، استانداری ایلام، معاونت برنامه‌ریزی.
12.  Statistics - of Iran, 1390, The general population and housing census, Ilam Governorate, Planning. (In Persian)
13. مرکز سکونت‌گاه‌های انسانی سازمان ملل متحد (هابیتات)، 1388، شهرها در فرایند جهانی‌شدن، گزارش جهانی سکونت‌گاه‌های انسانی، ترجمة رضا پورخردمند و دیگران، چاپ اول، مرکز مطالعات و برنامه‌ریزی شهر تهران.
13. United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat), 1388, The cities in the process of globalization, the World report on human settlements, Translated by: Pourkhrdmnd, R. et al., 1st edition, The Center of Studies and Planning in Tehran. (In Persian)
14. موحد، علی و دیگران، بررسی حکمروایی خوب شهری در محله‌های شهری (مورد مطالعه منطقۀ 19 شهرداری تهران)، فصلنامۀ مطالعات برنامه‌ریزی شهری، سال 1393، شمارة 7.
14.  Movahed, A. et al, The urban good governance in urban neighborhoods (the case of Tehran 19th District), Studies on Urban Planning, 1393, Vol. 7, No. 7. (In Persian)
15. نوبری، نازک و محمد رحیمی، 1389، حکمروایی خوب شهری (یک ضرورت تردیدناپذیر)، مرکز مطالعات و برنامه‌ریزی شهر تهران، دانش شهر، شمارة 11.
15. Nobari, N. and Rahimi, M., 1389, Urban good governance (an undeniable necessity), Centre for Studies and Planning in Tehran, Danesh Shahr, No. 11. (In Persian)
16. Unchs, 2000, Norms for Good Urban Governance,
17. UN-HABITAT, 2009, Urban Governance index (UGI) a tool to measure UrbanManagement Programme.
18. UN-HABITAT, 2003, Urban Management Program (UMP), what is the Urban Management Programme.
19. UNCHS, 1997, United Nations Commission on Human Settlements.
20. Progress in achieving good urban governance, 2009, www.un
Volume 49, Issue 3
October 2017
Pages 607-619
  • Receive Date: 11 November 2015
  • Revise Date: 20 April 2016
  • Accept Date: 23 April 2016
  • First Publish Date: 23 September 2017