سنجش تأثیرپذیری شهر از نماگرهای شهر هوشمند (مطالعۀ موردی: شهر زنجان)

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش ‏آموختة دورة دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه ‏ریزی شهری، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران

2 دانشیار جغرافیا و برنامه ‏ریزی شهری، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران

چکیده

به دنبال تجدید ساختار اقتصادی و اجتماعی جهانی، تحولی در مفهوم توسعة شهری و پارادایم‏های آن به‏وجود آمده است؛ از آن جمله شهر هوشمند پارادایمی برای توسعة شهرها در جامعة اطلاعاتی است. شهرهای هوشمند،به‏عنوان آیندة شهرهای انسانی، شهری فعال در زمینة فناوری، انعطاف‏پذیری، پایداری، خلاقیت،و قابل زندگی در جهان پیش‏بینی‏ شده‏اند و در حال تبدیل‏شدن به بخشی از چشم‏انداز دولت‏های ملی‏اند، زیرا با هدف افزایش کیفیت زندگی شهروندان ظهور یافته‏اند. این پژوهش با هدف تدقیق، بومی‏سازی و اولویت‏بندی، و همچنین سنجش اثر معیارهای شهر هوشمند در شهر زنجان انجام شده است. جامعة آماری تحقیق کارشناسان آشنا با مفاهیم شهر هوشمند در شهر زنجان است و ابزار جمع‏آوری داده‏ها پرسش‏نامه و مصاحبه است. تحلیل در دو بخش انجام یافته است: بخش اول توسط آزمون‏های آماری Spssانجام گرفته است و بخش دوم توسط نرم‏افزار میک‏مک. نتایج نشان داد معیارهای زیرساخت‏ فناوری، خدمات عمومی- اجتماعی، و دسترسی به ترتیب با وزن‏های 01657/0، 01636/0، و 01619/0 در اولویت‏های اول تا سوم برای هوشمندی شهر قرار دارند. همچنین، نتایج تحلیل اثرهای متقابل معیارها نشان‏دهندة پراکنش نامنظم معیارها در پلان تأثیرگذاری و تأثیر‏پذیری است. تحلیل نشان داد که متغیرها در بخش تأثیرگذاری و تأثیرپذیری متوسط دارای تراکم زیادی است و سیستم مورد مطالعه دارای ناپایداری است. در نهایت، شش معیار راهبردی، کلیدی، و استراتژیک سیستم شناسایی شدند که برای هوشمندی شهر زنجان بسیار مهم‏اند؛ این معیارها عبارت‏اند از 1. زیرساخت‏های فناوری؛ 2. توانمندی و صلاحیت شهروندان؛ 3. حکمروایی شفاف؛ 4. مشارکت شهروندان؛ 5. امکانات فرهنگی؛ 6. جاذبه‏های گردشگری.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Measuring the effectiveness of the city from "smart city" indicators. Case Study: Zanjan

نویسندگان [English]

  • Jalil Mohammadi 1
  • Alireza Mohammadi 2
  • Ataa Ghafari 2
  • Mohammad Hassan Yazdani 2
1 Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Humanities, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
2 Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Humanities, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Cities play a vital role in the lives of the vast majority of people, yet face great challenges beyond ‎regions, nations and continents, and most cities are the main drivers of change. Recent ‎technological developments have renewed belief in the positive impacts of ICT and other ‎innovative technologies in the city. The combination of smart solutions (active technology) to ‎address major social challenges and focus on the city as key drivers of change has led to the ‎concept of smart city. Finally, scientific studies on smart city development readiness are largely ‎limited to developed countries. And the literature on smart city readiness in developing countries ‎is at an early stage and needs more empirical support. The transformation of a city into a smart ‎city requires considerable efforts by political representatives, managers, residents, entrepreneurs, ‎as well as its various communities. The concept of smart city is evolving rapidly, and the ‎attention of the world as a promising response to the challenge of urban sustainability in large ‎and small cities. Given the different structure of Iranian cities, this study seeks to localize the ‎indicators and analyze their interactions for any planning and management.‎

‎ Methodology
The study of the components of smart city in Zanjan deals with 6 components, 30 benchmarks ‎and 100 standard indices designed in scientific societies around the world. By method, the ‎present study is a descriptive field type. In order to carry out the research, the research ‎components, criteria and indices were extracted from the theoretical foundations of the research ‎and then prioritized by in-depth experts. Library and field methods have been used to collect the ‎required information. Due to the lack of familiarity of most experts with the concepts of smart ‎city, only experts in the statistical population who were familiar with the concept of smart city ‎were included. The sampling method was theoretical saturation and by this method in 21 samples ‎we achieved our goals. In this study, first, the importance and impact of indicators on the ‎intelligence of cities were measured and analyzed by SPSS. Then, the extent of impact as well as ‎the interactions between the components, criteria and indices were measured and analyzed with ‎Micmac software. Because interviews and questionnaires have been used, the research is a ‎composite (sequential exploratory model). And the composition is in the concluding phase. Both ‎questionnaires were used by experts in this field.‎

Results and discussion
In the first part, after determining the components, criteria and indicators affecting the ‎intelligence of cities and in line with the main objectives of the research, determining the ‎importance and weight of each component, criteria and indicators. Finally, 30 criteria with 100 ‎indicators were finalized and these indicators were prioritized by experts. The data were ‎analyzed by SPSS software using Friedman test and the significance of each criterion and index ‎was determined and prioritized. The three components of smart mobility, smart governance, and ‎smart economy with weights of 0.01577,‎‏ ‏‎0.01394 and 0.01381 are the first to third priority, ‎respectively, and have the highest weight and importance in smart cities. The criteria for smart ‎mobility component include technology infrastructure, national, local access and sustainable ‎mobility, which are prioritized with weights 0.01657, 0.01619, 0.01609 and 0.01424, ‎respectively. Two criteria of smart governance components including public-social services and ‎transparent governance with weights of 0.01636 and 0.01153 were significant. Also the criteria ‎of smart economy component were international interactions, productivity, innovation, ‎entrepreneurship, economic image of the city and labor market flexibility with weights 0.01601, ‎‎0.01597, 0.01544, 0.01455, 0.01161 and 0.00928 respectively. In the analytical analysis of the ‎findings, the indicators of Internet penetration, municipality planning strategy and e-government ‎access have the weights of 0.01694, 0.01687 and 0.01684, respectively.‎
In the second part, we have used Micmac software to analyze the interaction of criteria. ‎In order to make the results more realistic and realistic, the analysis software was created in the ‎Micmac Matrix software and adjusted in 30 different criteria to 30 * 30 dimensions. Based on ‎the matrix output, the 10 criteria that had the most direct impact on the system in order of rating ‎are: 1- Technology infrastructure (677) 2- Citizens empowerment (655) 3- Transparent ‎governance (610) 4- Citizen participation (519) 5- Cultural facilities (440) 6- Sustainable and safe ‎transportation (440) 7- Lifelong learning (429) 8- Tourism attraction (406) 9- Educational ‎facilities (395) 10- National access (395). The 10 criteria that have a direct impact on city ‎intelligence are, respectively, priority and priority; 1- Citizen competence and competence (542) ‎‎2- City pollution level (508) 3- Urban productivity (497) 4- Entrepreneurship in the city (497) 5- ‎Transparent Governance (463) 6- City Tourism Attraction (440) 7- International Interaction (440) ‎‎8- Preservation of Environment (418) 9- Educational Facilities (384) 10- Citizen Participation ‎‎(384).‎

‎ Conclusion
The analysis of the results of the first section showed that the relevant components, criteria and ‎indices in the three prioritization of the rankings were almost identical. Thus, the component and ‎criterion that is ranked higher in the ranking also have more important indicators, while the ‎component and the criterion that is in the lower priorities have the least important ones. In the ‎second stage, the analysis of the interaction of criteria on the intelligence of the city is examined. ‎The results of the MicMac method in impact analysis indicate the irregular distribution of criteria ‎in the impact plan. The analysis of the plan and related diagrams show that the variables in the ‎medium of influence are high density and the studied system is unstable. Based on the results of ‎Structural Analysis and Micmac software, the direct and indirect effective criteria were ‎determined. Key variables and strategic indicators were also identified. What is important is that ‎improvement and improvement in each of the dimensions and components of the smart city will ‎be very influential in city intelligence because systematic reviews and evaluations of smart cities ‎do not consider growth in all dimensions. Therefore, any benchmark and component that can be ‎upgraded should be a priority.‎

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Smart City
  • indicators
  • interactions
  • Prioritization
  • Zanjan City.‎
  1. پیرانی، فرزانه، 1394، تدوینمعیارهاوشاخص‏هایشهر هوشمند موردمطالعه؛ منطقة3شهراصفهان، پایان‏نامة کارشناسی ارشد، به راهنمایی دکتر مهین نسترن، گروه شهرسازی‏- برنامه‏ریزی شهری، دانشکدة معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان.
  2. سرگلزایی، شریفه و محمدابراهیم‏زاده سپاسگزار، صمد، 1396، مدل‏سازی پذیرش فناوری از سوی کاربران برای دستیابی به شهر هوشمند مطالعة موردی: شهرهای مرکز استان، مطالعات شهری، دورة 6، ش 22، صص ۲۷-42.
  3. عبدالله‏زاده، بهزاد، 1395، تحلیل و ارزیابی چالش‏های پیش‏ روی بُعد مردم در شهر هوشمند، مطالعة موردی: منطقة 9 شهرداری مشهد، پایان‏نامة کارشناسی ارشد، به راهنمایی دکتر امیدعلی خوارزمی، دانشکدة ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.
  4. مزینی، امیرحسین و مرادحاصل، نیلوفر، 1395، بررسی اثر بهره‏گیری از قابلیت‏های فضای مجازی در تحقق توسعة پایدار شهری ایران، فصل‏نامة علوم و تکنولوژی محیط زیست، مقالات آمادة انتشار، انتشار آنلاین از تاریخ 5 دی 1395.
  5. محمدی، غلامرضا، 1395، تبیین الگوی شهر هوشمند درکلان‏شهر مشهد مبتنی بر توسعة پایدار، رسالة دکتری، به راهنمایی دکتر محمدرحیم رهنما، دانشکدة ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.
    1. Pirani, Farzaneh, 2015, Developing Smart City Criteria and Indicators in Study Area 3, Isfahan, MA Thesis under the guidance of Dr. Mahin Nastaran, Department of Urban Planning - Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Isfahan University of Art.
    2. Sargolzai, Sharifah and Mohammad Ibrahimzadeh Sepaghgosar, Samad, 2018, Modeling Technology Acceptance by Users to Achieve Smart City Case Study: Provincial Downtowns, Urban Studies, Vol. 6, No. 22, PP. 27-42.
    3. Abdollah Zadeh, Behzad, 2016, Analysis and Evaluation of the Challenges of People's Next Dimension in Smart City, Case Study: District 9 of Mashhad Municipality, MA Thesis under the guidance of Dr. Omid Ali Kharazmi, Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
    4. Mozaiani, Amir Hossein and Morad Hasel, Niloufar, 2016, Investigating the Effect of Utilizing Virtual Space Capabilities on Realizing Sustainable Urban Development of Iran, Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Articles Published, Online Release, January 5, 2016.

10. Mohammadi, Gholamreza, 2016, Explaining Smart City Pattern in Sustainable Development Metropolis, PhD thesis under the guidance of Dr. Mohammad Rahim Rahnama, Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

11. Abella, Alberto; Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, Marta and De-Pablos-Heredero, Carmen, 2017, A model for the analysis of data-driven innovation and value generation in smart cities' ecosystems. Cities, Vol. 64, PP. 47-53.

12. Afzalan, Nader; Sanchez, Thomas and Evans-Cowley, Jennifer, 2017, Creating smarter cities: considerations for selecting online participatory tools. Cities, Vol. 67, No. 1, PP. 21-30.

13. Ajza Shokouhi, M.; Naghibi Rokni, S. N.; Alizadeh, H. and Ahmadi, A., 2016, Evaluation of smart city criteria in Ahvaz City, Iran. Int. J. Architect. Eng. Urban Plan, Vol. 26, No. 2, PP. 141-149.

14. Albino, Vito and Dangelico, Rosa Maria, 2012, "Green Cities in to Practice", in R. Simpson and M. Zimmermann, eds., The Economyof Green Cities: AWorld Compendium on the Green Urban Economy (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Science Business Media B.V., 2012).

15. Alexander Prado, Lara; Eduardo Moreira Da, Costa; Thiago Zilinscki, Furlani and Tan Yigitcanlar, T., 2016, Smartness that matters: Towards a comprehensive and human-centred characterisation of smart cities. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, Vol. 2, No.8.

16. Anthopoulos, Leonidas and Fitsilis, Panos, 2014, Smart cities and their roles in city competition: A classification. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, Vol. 10, No. 1, PP. 67-81.

17. Arifianto, E., 2017, Strategi Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia dengan Pendekatan Pola Komunikasi Efektif dalam Mewujudkan Konsep Malang Smart City, Jurnal Komunikasi Global, Vol. 6, No. 2, PP. 175-184.

18. Arpan, Kumar Kar; Manmohan, Prasad Gupta; P. Vigneswara, Ilavarasan and Yogesh, K. Dwivedi, 2017, Advances in smart cities smarter people, governance, and solutions, crc Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

19. Baccarne, Bastiaan; Mechant, Peter and Schuurman, Dimitri, 2014, Empowered Cities? An Analysis of the Structure and Generated Value of the Smart City Ghent, Springer, PP. 157-182.

20. Barrionuevo, J. M.; Berrone, P. and Ricart, J. E., 2012, Smart cities, sustainable progress. IESE Insight, Vol.1, No. 14, PP. 50-57.

21. Batty, Michael; Axhausen, K. W.; Giannotti, F.; Pozdnoukhov, A.; Bazzani, A.; Wachowicz, M., 2014, Smart cities of the future. European Physical Journal Special Topics, Vol. 214, PP. 481-518.

22. Bibri, Simon Elias and Krogstie, John, 2017, Smart sustainable cities of the future: An extensive interdisciplinary literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 31, PP. 183-212.

23. Bolivar, Manuel Pedro, 2018, Governance models and outcomes to foster public value creation in smart cities. Scienze Regionali, Vol. 17, No. 1, PP. 57-80.

24. Caragliu, Andrea; Del Bo, Chiara and Nijkamp, Peter, 2011, Smart cities in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, Vol. 18, No. 2, PP. 65-82. doi:10.1080/10630732.2011.601117

25. Cardullo, P. and Kitchin, R., 2017, Being a ‘citizen’ in the smart city: Up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation, The Programmable City Working Paper, 30, 15 May 2017.

26. Chatterjee, S. and Kar, A., 2015, Smart Cities in developing economies: A literature review and policy insights. Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, PP. 2335- 2340.

27. Chauhan, S.; Neetima, A. and Arpan Kumar, K. 2016, Addressing big data challenges in smart cities: A systematic literature review. Info 18, Vol. 1, No. 4, PP. 73-90.

28. Chourabi, H.; Nam, T.; Walker, S.; Gil-Garcia, J. R.; Mellouli, S.; Nahon, K. et al., 2012, Understanding smart cities: An integrative framework. In System Science (HICSS), 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on (PP. 2289-2297), January. IEEE.

29. Cohen, Bruce, 2012. What exactly is a smart city, Journal of Co. Exist, Vol. 19.

30. Colding, Johan and Barthel, Stephan, 2017, “An urban ecology critique on the ‘Smart City’ model -ScienceDirect,” J. of Cleaner Production, Vol. 164, No. 5, PP. 95-101.

31. Dameri, R., 2017, Smart City Implementation, Creating Economic and Public Value in Innovative Urban Systems, Springer International Publishing AG 2017.

32. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), 2014, Intelligent transport systems. Retrieved August 2016 from http://www.etsi.org/technologies-clusters/technologies/intelligent-transport.

33. Fajrillah, Zarina Mohamad and Wirda, Novarika, 2018, Smart city vs smart village, Journal Mantik Penusa, Vol. 22, No. 1, PP. 1-6.

34. Falconer, Gordon and Mitchell, Shane, 2012, Smart City Framework a Systematic Process for Enabling Smart, Cisco Internet Business Solutions Group (IBSG).

35. Giffinger, R. and H. Gudrun, 2010, Smart cities ranking: An effective instrument for the positioning of the cities? http://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2099/8550.

36. Giffinger, Rudolf; Fertner, Christian; Kramar, Hans; Kalasek, Robert; Pichler-Milanovi, Natasa and Meijers, Evert, 2007, Smart Cities: Ranking of European Medium-Sized Cities. Vienna, Austria: Centre of Regional Science (SRF), Vienna University of Technology.

37. Hamza, Karim, 2016, Smart city implementation framework for developing countries: The case of Egypt. In J. R. Gil-Garcia. T. A. Pardo. & T. Nam (Eds.). Smarter as the new urban agenda: A comprehensive view of 1he 21st century city (PP. 171-190). Public Adminisrration and Information Technology Series Switzerland; Springer Publishing.

38. Harrison, C.; Eckman, B.; Hamilton, R.; Hartswick, P.; Kalagnanam, J.; Paraszczak, J. and Williams, P., 2010, Foundations for Smarter Cities. IBM Journal of Research and Development, Vol. 54, No. 4.

39. IBM., 2009, A vision of smarter cities. Retrieved October 2016, from http://www-03.ibm.com/press/attachments/IBV_Smarter_Cities_-_Final.pdf

40. ISO, 2014, Sustainable development of communities- Indicators for city services and quality of life. http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=62436 (Accessed 01-07-2016).

41. ITU., 2014, Intelligent sustainable buildings for smart sustainable cities. Retrieved August 2016 from http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/ssc/Pages/default.aspx

42. Karadağ, Tunc, 2018, An Evaluation of the Smart City Approach, A Thesis Submitted to The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University, February 2018, 78 pages.

43. Kesswani, Nishtha and Kumar, Sanjay, 2018, The Smart-X model for Smart Cities, 42nd IEEE International Conference on Computer Software & Applications, 0730-3157/18IEEE.

44. Komninos, Nicos, 2008, Intelligent cities: innovation, knowledge systems, and Digital spaces, Spon Press, London and New York, Routledge.

45. Kourtit, K.; Nijkamp, P. and Arribas, D., 2012, Smart cities in perspective: A comparative European study by means of self-organizing maps. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, Vol. 1, No. 25, PP. 229- 246.

46. Liu, D.; Huang, R. and Wosinski, M., 2017, Smart Learning in Smart Cities, Springer, PP. 240.

47. Lombardi, Patrizia; Giordano, Silvia; Farouh, Hend and Yousef, Wael, 2012, Modelling the smart city performance. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, Vol. 25, PP. 137-149.

48. Mattern, Shannon, 2013, Methodolatry and the art of measure. Places Journal, https://doi.org/10.22269/131105.

49. Mazhar, M.; Anand Paul, Awais Ahmad and Gwanggil Jeon, 2017, IoT-Based Big Data: From Smart City towards Next Generation Super City Planning, International journal on Semantic Web and information systems, Vol. 13, No. 1, PP. 28-47.

50. Mishra, R., 2017, Smart City: A Path Of Growth Of India, Journal of Public Policy & Environmental Management, Vol. 1, No. 3, PP. 20-26.

51. Mkrtychev, O.; Starchyk, Y.; Yusupova, S. and Zaytceva, O., 2018, Analysis of various definitions for Smart City concept, IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering, No. 365, PP. 022065.

52. Mohanty, Saraju P.; Choppali, Uma and Kougianos, Elias, 2016, Everything you wanted to know about smart cities: The internet of things is the backbone. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, Vol. 5, PP. 60-70.

53. Mora, Luca; Bolici, Roberto and Deakin, Mark, 2017, The first two decades of smart-city research: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Urban Technology, Vol. 24, No. 1, PP. 3-27.

54. Morozov, Evgeny, 2013, To save everything, click here: Technology, solutionism, and the urge to fix problems that don’t exist. UK: Penguin.

55. Murray,  Art; Minevich, Mark and Abdoullaev, Azamat, 2011, The Future of the Future: Being smart about smart cities, KM world, Vol. 20, Issue 9.

56. Nam, T. and Pardo, T. A., 2011, Conceptualizing Smart City with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In 12th Annual international conference on digital government research, 12-15 June 12-15 College Park, MD.

57. Nam, T. and Pardo, T. A., 2016, Smart city as urban innovation: Focusing on management, policy, and context, Conference: ICEGOV 2011, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, Tallinn, Estonia, September 26-28.

58. Neirotti, Paolo; Marco, Alberto De and Cagliano, Anna Corinna, 2014, Current trends in smart city initiatives: Some stylised facts. Cities, Vol. 38, PP. 25-36. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.010.

59. Piro, Giuseppe; Cianci, Iiaria; Grieco, Luigi Alfredo; Boggia, Gennaro and Camarda, Pietro, 2014, Information centric services in smart cities. Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 88, No. 1, PP. 169-188.

60. Rios, Patrice, 2008, Creating the smart city. Available from http://archive.udmercy.edu:8080/bitstream/ handle/10429/393/2008_rios_smart.pdf?

61. Shaimaa, H., 2018, The Mechanisms of Achieving a Smart city, Journal of Engineering Sciences, Vol.2, No. 25.

62. Shen, L.; Huang, Z.; Wong, S.; Liao, S. and Yingli, L., 2018, A holistic evaluation of smart city performance in the context of China, Journal of Cleaner Production, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.281.

63. Silva, Bhagya Nathali; Khan, Murad and Han, Kijun, 2018, Towards sustainable smart cities: A review of trends, architectures, components in smart cities, Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 38, PP. 697-713.

64. Toppeta, Donato, 2008, The Smart City Vision: How Innovation and ICT Can Build Smart, “Livable”, Sustainable Cities. The Innovation Knowledge Foundation. 2010; Available from http://www.thinkinnovation.org/file/research/23/en/Toppeta_Report_005_2010.pdf

65. Vu, Khuong and Hartley, Kris, 2018, Promoting Smart Cities in Developing Countries: Policy Insights from Vietnam; Telecommunications Policy, Forthcoming.

66. Washburn, Doug and Sindhu, Usman, 2010. Helping CIOs Understand “Smart City” Initiatives: Defining the Smart City, Its Drivers, and the Role of the CIO. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research, Inc.

67. Yigitcanlar, Tan and Kamruzzaman, MD., 2018, Does smart city policy lead to sustainability of cities? Land Use Policy, Vol. 73, No. 1, PP. 49-58.

68. Yigitcanlar, Tan, 2016, Technology and the city: systems, applications and implications. Routledge, New York, NY.