عنوان مقاله [English]
Thorough investigation and monitoring of spatial, social policies pertaining to city zoning ( case : Gorgan )
Spatial social policies comprises of sets of apt decisions taken by public entities at different levels including national, regional ,urban and intera urban ones .These would have an impact upon human livelihood as well as the quality of the life and other corresponding urban problems .With regard to urban policy decisions there exists a likelihood that some political key figure layers as well as medias and pressure groups, away from formal mechanism and decision processes being able to prioritize their political wills .The major objective of this paper is to thoroughly investigate and monitor the spatial social inequality policies detected in some zones in Gorgan as this work's study area. From objective side, this study has an applied nature. However, methodologically speaking it relies on a descriptive and analytical approach . This study is based on documentations as well as some mathematical and quantitative techniques including WASPAS ,WSA , COPRAS and Entropy Shannon . This is followed by application of some combining technique including kanderast?. This study suggests that Gorgan 's eight zones show uneven distribution regarding urban services indices. That means that there exists some drastic discrepancies with regard to possession of social justice indices associated with different zones. As such, based on kanderast combination technique, zone 4 possesses the highest value as opposed to zone 1 regarding social welfare. Prioritizing different Gorgan's zones based on urban social services reveals that zones 4,3, and 6 are ranked as the most privileged ones followed by zones 7 and 8 as semi privileged ones. Zones 2, 5 and 1 are ranked as the deprived ones regarding urban infrastructures.It is argued that Gorgan's key corresponding urban figures, more specifically urban politicians and strategic urban planning consultants should reduce spatial inequalities. This can be achieved by utilizing modified, improved urban policies and some budget amendment. The changes along this line will ultimately assure more sustainable urban environments.
Key words:Social Policies, Spatial Urban Justice, Decision Making Technique, Urban Planning , Gorgan City
Generally speaking, political, social approaches as well as the politics and its social implication have great impacts upon the production of geographical space.This means that the politics along with political space economy aim to pave the way and ultimately shape decent urban spaces for the citizens.In fact, the geographic spaces are the setting of different economic, social and political functions in which affects the production of urban space.It is suggested that the government with its apt policies is capable of transforming urban spatial organization as well. The government is responsible for creation of urban geographic spaces and the corresponding functional structural changes as well as geographic balances and imbalances. Generally speaking, accomplishing targeted and well balanced urban development is the major objective of urban regional planning. Furthermore, urban services are being considered as the most fundamental realm of urban planning policies. Therefore, service allocation processes, due to its impact upon urban livability and promotion of comfort level and well being, should receive prime attention regarding advance urban management.
This study has descriptive and analytical nature and from objective aspect it is applied as well. Our approach further bases on the existing relevant documentation in order to compile the required information.The statistical population is comprised of Gorgan's eight zones. Regarding analytical sphere, the study applies WSA, COPRAS, and WASPAS.
Results and discussion
Based on WASPAS technique those area with value close to 1 are considered to be privileged as opposed to deprived ones with values close to 0 .
This study suggests that different zones in Gorgan experience varied value levels regarding welfare indices. As such, zones 4, 8, 6, 7, 3, 5, 2 and 1 with values of 0.4096, 0.4022, 0.3802, 0.2981, 0.2540, 0.1461, 0.1192 and 0.0696 respectively correspond to different hierarchical spectrum level as far as the urban welfare is concerned. This indicates the unfair and unsuitable status of selected Gorgan's zones as far as urban welfare indices are concerned .Based on COPRAS technique, out of 16 urban service indices, zones 4, 1, 2, 5, 3, 7, 6, and 8 with the development coefficient 1 , 0.8222, 0.7423, 0.5762, 0.5762, 0.5013, 0.4076 and 0.1935 respectively correspond to different hierarchical spectrum level as far as the urban welfare is concerned.With regard to the application of WSA technique, zone 4 with corresponding development coefficient 0.5081 got the highest rank followed by zone 3 (0.3226). Zone 6 with development coefficient of 0.3220 holds the third position followed by zone 7 (0.2590). Zone 8 with development coefficient 0.2047 ranked the fifth followed by zone 2 (0.3226 ) Lastly, zone 5 with development coefficient 0.0804 ranked seventh followed by zone 1 (0.0417).Based on kandrast combination technique out of 8 selected zones, zone 4 ranked the highest as opposed to zone 1 (lowest rank) as far as the urban welfare service indices are concerned . Furthermore, zones 4, 3, and 6 are categorized as privileged and abundant zones . This is followed by zones 7 and 8 known as semi privileged ones. However, zones 2 ,5 and 1 are categorized as deprived ones with respect to receiving urban welfare services.
Based on forgoing discussions, Kandrast technique would be well justified to accomplish better allocation of urban services and combating spatial inequalities between Gorgan 's different zones. Our study reveals the drastic differences and inequalities among Gorgan's selected zones as far as urban welfare services is concerned. Zone 4, 3 and 6 are categorized as privileged and abundant zones. This is followed by zone 7 and 8 known as semi privileged ones and zones 2, 5 and 1 are categorized as deprived ones with respect to receiving urban welfare services. Regarding fair distribution of urban welfare services, the following recommendations sound appropriate :
Urban planning key figures should involve and incentivize citizens in implementation of urban plans. That means more active community participation is highly recommended.
41. Afrough, Emad, 1998, Space and Social Inequality, The Tarbiat Modares University Press, Tehran.
42. Albrechts, L., 2004, Strategic (spatial) planning reexamined, Environment and Planning B, No. 31, PP. 743-758.
43. Bashiriyeh, Hosein, 1994, History Of Political Thought In The Twentieth Century: The Political Philosophy Of John Rawls, Etelaate- Siasai va Eghtesadi Journal, Vol. 2-1, No. 11.
44. Boyne, G.; Powell, M. and Ashworth, R., 2001, Spatial Equity and Public Services: An empirical analysis of local government finance in England, Public Management Review, No. 3, PP. 19-34.
45. Brown, Nicholas; Rayan, Griffis; Kevin, Hamilton; Sharon, Irish and Sarah, Kanouse, 2007, What Makes Justice Spatial? What Makes Spaces Just? Three Interviews on the Concept of Spatial Justice, Critical Planning, Vol. 14, No. 1, PP. 1- 28.
46. Cardoso, Ricardo and Bredavazquez, Isabel, 2007, Social Justice as a Guide to Planning Theory and Practice: Analyzing the Portuguese Planning System, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol. 31, No. 2, PP. 384-400.
47. Clark, T. N., 1981, Urban policy analysis: directions for future research, Annual review of socialogy, Vol. 11, PP. 437-455. Sage Publications, Incorporated.
48. Dadashpoor, Hashem and Rostami, Faramarz, 2012 A, Evaluation Of Integrated SpatialJustice In Urban Public Services Based On Population Distribution, Availability And Efficiency In Yasuj City, Journal Of Urban And Regional Studies And Research, Vol.10 , No.89 , PP .1-22.
49. Erkip, Feyzan, 1997, The distribution of urban public services: the case of parks and recreational services in Ankara, Cities, Vol. 14, No. 6, PP. 353-361.
50. Gray, R. (2002). Social Accounting Project and Accounting Organization and SocietyPrivileging Engagement, Imaging New Accounting Organizations and Society.
51. Harvey, D., 1996, Gustice Nature and Geography of Difference, Blakwell Publishers, Oxford, AUK.
52. Harvey, David, 1973, Social justice and the city, Edward Arnold, London.
53. Hillier, Jean, 2012, Shadows Of Power, Translated By Pouladi Kamal, Tehran: Iran Engineers Society Press.
54. Hoch, Charles, 1996, A pragmatic inquiry about planning and power. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by S. J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, and R.W. Burchell, 30-44.
55. Hutchison, R., 2010, Chicago school of urban sociology, Encyclopedia of urban studies, PP. 127-131.
56. Huxhold, W. E., 2002, An introduction to urban geographic information systems. New York: Oxford University Press.
57. Kanbur, Ravi and Venables, Anthony J., 2005, Spatial Inequality Development. Oxford: Oxford University.
58. Mirsendesy, Seyed Mohammad, 1996, Effective Factors For People’s Perception from Justice Of Its Relationship Equality (Inequality), The Case Study: Mashhad City, M.S Thesis In Sociology, Tarbiat Modarres University, Faculty Of Human Sciences.
59. Moor, J., 2000, Learning cities, the global urban observatory. Habitat Debate, Vol. 6, No. 1, PP. 7-10.
60. Pacione, M., 2001, Urban geography, a global perspective. London: Routledge.
61. Smith, G., 1999, Area-based initiatives: The rationale and options for area targeting. CASE Paper 25. Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion. London School of Economics. Available from. <http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/CASEpaper25.pdf>.
63. Talen, E., 1998, Visualising fairness. Equity maps for planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 64, No. 1, PP. 22-38.
64. UNCHS [United Nations Centre for Human Settlements], 2001, Cities in a globalizing world. Global report on human settlements 2001. London: Earthscan.
65. UNDP [United Nations Development Programme], 2005, Human development report 2005: International cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an unequal world. Human development report. New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). p. 372.
66. Young, Irish Marion, 1990, Justice and the politics of difference, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
67. Dufaux, Frederic, (2016), Birth announcement, justice spatial/spatial justice, www.jssj.org. (October 2016).
68. Saparauskas, J. Zavadskas, E. K. Turskis, Z. (2011). Selection of Facade's Alternatives of Commercial and Public Buildings Based on MultipleCriteria, International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 15(2), pp. 189–203.
69. Ebrahimnia, V. (2017). Policy-making in Tehran: exploring the dichotomy of integration-disintegration. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi, 22(1), 15-28. (In Persian)
70. Ahdenjad, Mohsen; Zolfi, Ali and Norouzi, Mohammad Javad, 2013, Evaluation of population distribution and distribution of services in urban areas with the approach of sustainable development and social justice using VIKOR and TOPSIS models, Case study of Zanjan, Quarterly Journal of New Attitudes in Geography Human, p. 5, p. 2, p. 169-183. (In Persian)
71. Eftekhari, Rokanuddin and Tavakoli, Morteza, 2002, Populist Development, Tehran: Publisher of Bazargani Publishing Company. (In Persian)
72. Andrew, Vincent, 1992, Theories of Government, translated by Hossein Boshrouyeh, Tehran: Ney Publishing. (In Persian)
73. Pourahmad, A., & Ali Khaliji, M. (2014). The assessment factors in improving urban services by VIKOR (case study Bonab). Journal of Spatial Planning, 4(2), 1-16. (In Persian)
74. Poorasghar Sangachin, Farzam; Salehi, Ismail and Masnavi, Mohammad Reza, 2010, Comparative-analytical comparison of methods for measuring sustainable development, Environmental Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 67 82. (In Persian)
75. Pilevar, Ali Asghar, 2013, An Introduction to the Urban Economic Politics of Iran, Tehran: Daneshnegar. (In Persian)
76. Pilevar, Ali Asghar, 2016, Evaluation of Determining the Political Approach in Urban-Regional Inequality Case Study: North Khorasan, Journal of Spatial Planning, Vol. 6, No. 22, pp. 77-90. (In Persian)
77. Hafeznia, Mohammad Reza, Ahmadipour, Zahra and Ghaderi Hajat, Mostafa, 2010, Politics and Space, Mashhad: Papli. (In Persian)
78. Heidari Sarban, Lawyer, 2014, Assessment and Prioritization of Rural Areas in terms of Social Welfare Levels (Case Study: Pars Abad County), Journal of Spatial Planning, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 61-76. (In Persian)
79. Dadashpour, Hashem; Alizadeh, Bahram and Rostami, Faramarz, 2015, Explaining the conceptual framework of spatial justice in urban planning with a focus on the concept of justice in the school of Islam, Quarterly Journal of the Role of the World, Vol. 1-5, pp. 75-85. (In Persian)
80. Dadashpour, Hashem and Rostami, Faramarz, 2011, Study and analysis of the distribution of urban public services from the perspective of spatial justice, a case study: Yasuj City, Journal of Geography and Regional Development, Vol. 16, pp .; 171-198. (In Persian)
81. Daneshpour, Zohreh, 2006, Analysis of Spatial Inequality in Suburban Environments (An Attempt to Use the Strategic Planning and Management Approach in Tehran), Journal of Fine Arts, Vol. 28, pp. 5-14. (In Persian)
82. Dehghan, Hossein, 2007, Opportunities and Threats for Education in the Face of Spatial Inequality in Information and Communication Technology, Quarterly Journal of Education, Vol. 23, pp. 126-163. (In Persian)
83. Rabbani, Rasool; Police Station, Samad; Ghasemi, Vahid; Forough, Al-Sadat Orizi and Ismaili, Reza, 2008, A Study of the Relationship between Social Welfare and Social Capital in the Development Process, Case Study: Cities of Isfahan Province, Research Journal of Isfahan University, Vol. 29, No. 1. (In Persian)
84. Zahedi Asl, Mohammad, 2003, Fundamentals of Social Welfare, Allameh Tabatabai University Press. (In Persian)
85. Zbardast, Esfandiar, 2004, city size, Tehran: Ministry of Housing and Urban Development Publications, Urban Planning and Architecture Research Center. (In Persian)
86. Ziari, Keramatollah, 2004, Principles and Methods of Regional Planning, Ch 3, Yazd: Yazd University Press. (In Persian)
87. Saeidnia, Ahmad, 2003, Urban Land Use, Green Book of Municipalities, Vol. 2, Publications of the Organization of Municipalities and Rural Affairs. (In Persian)
88. Sharifzadegan, Mohammad Hossein, 2016, Critical Evaluation of Resources, Perceptions and Theories of Welfare Programs in Iran, Social Studies and Research in Iran, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp. 127-145. (In Persian)
89. Sharifi, Abdolnabi, 2006, Social Justice and the City: An Analysis of Regional Inequalities in the City of Ahvaz, PhD Thesis in Geography and Urban Planning, University of Tehran. (In Persian)
90. Shahiki Tash, Mohammad Nabi; Yaghfouri, Hossein and Darvishi, Baqer, 2015, Investigating the severity of spatial and regional welfare imbalances in the provinces of Iran (comparative welfare study based on the views of Harvey and Smith), Regional Planning Journal, Q5 , Sh 17, pp. 15-30. (In Persian)
91. Andalib, Alireza and Sabetgadam, Mohammad Ali, 2009, The Role of Sustainable Urban Development Revenues in Spatial-Physical Planning, City Identity Magazine, Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 88-88. (In Persian)
92. Fitz Petrick, Tony, 2002, Welfare Theory, translated by Hormoz Homayounpour, Tehran: Gam No Publishing. (In Persian)
93. Capurasso, James and David, Levin, 2008, Theories of Political Economy, translated by Mahmoud Abdullahzadeh, Tehran: Third. (In Persian)
94. Moein, Mohammad, 1992, Farhang-e Farsi, Ch 8, Tehran: Amirkabir. (In Persian)
95. Mehdizadeh, Javad, 2007, Strategic Planning for Urban Development, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran: Payam Sima Design and Publishing Company. (In Persian)
96. Mousavi, Miranjef, 2014, ranking the neighborhoods of Sardasht in terms of moving towards creativity with emphasis on the realization of a creative city using TOPSIS and ANP. Geography and urban and regional planning., Vol. 10 ,. Pp. 19-38. (In Persian)
97. Musa Khani, Gholamreza, 2013, Analysis of Social Welfare in Iran and Its Impact on Income Inequality, M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Economics, Shiraz University . (In Persian)
98. Hashemi, Manaf and Yahyapour, Mehdi, 2011, Principles and foundations of urban services management in the municipality, Tehran: Publications of the Organization of Municipalities and Villages. (In Persian)
99. Hiran Di, Yas and Amanayak, Baker, 1989, Rural Planning Journal, translated by Nasser Farid, Center for Rural Research and Studies. (In Persian)