Identifying and Prioritizing the Strategies for Reducing the Impact of Urban Areas Against Military Threats (Case Study: District One in Tehran Eleventh Region)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Faculty of Urban Planning, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran.

2 M.A. Student of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Art University of Tehran.

3 M.A. Student of Urban Planning, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran.

4 M.A. Student of Urban Planning, University of Urmia

Abstract

Identifying and Prioritizing the Strategies for Reducing the Impact of Urban Areas Against Military Threats (Case Study: District One in Tehran Eleventh Region)
Introduction
Urbanisation and the development of metropolitan centres on the one hand and their exposure to the threat of war and military attacks, on the other hand, have caused lots of damages, casualties and economic and social cost for them. Considering the strategic place of Iran in the region and the world is one of the best ways to decrease urban area vulnerabilities when at the time military threat is the passive defence. Whereas, urban land use planning plays a critical role in urban planning as far as some times urban land use planning has been called urban planning. Therefore, according to the above, urban management by using complementary approach in urban planning can decrease threats and provide safety and security for cities. Changes resulting from the concentration of economic, social, cultural and political activities in cities, as well as the lack of attention to the features of a safe and ready environment against military threats in recent decades, have decreased vulnerability of today's cities as a living environment for people to achieve Sustained urban living in times of crisis. Based on this, urban planning seeks to improve the quality of life of residents and build a safe and secure city for living in all circumstances, especially in times of crisis, which is the way to achieve this by defence the principles of non-operational defence to reduce the vulnerability of cities in times of military threats. Therefore, in this research, the factors affecting urban vulnerability to military threats are identified based on the concept of passive defence and are measured in Tehran metropolis as the capital of the country's political and economic capital. In this research, District 1, District One in Tehran's Eleventh Region has been used as a study area. District one of zone eleven of Tehran city is the case study of this research. This area has introduced as one of the main parts of city defence core in Tehran master plan, and the specific feature in this area is the wide variety of uses and function. Crucial political and administrative functions located in this area has resulted in the political and security importance of the area, and it has always been mentioned as one of the strategic parts of Tehran.
Methodology
The methodology of this research is based on explanatory-analytic study and data collection and has been done through library method and questionnaires. Also, for analysing information, ARCGIS, SPSS and EXPERT CHOICE software have been used, and the AHP method has been used to weigh out non-operational defence indicators and Friedman test to prioritise vulnerability reduction strategies in the event of military threats.The main goal of the current study is that identifying and prioritising the Strategies for Reducing the Impact of Urban Areas Against Military Threats in District One in Tehran's Eleventh Region. To these aims, first of all, a review of important terms of the research has been done and based on that, effective criteria and indicators in urban land use planning which can reduce urban vulnerability has been identified. Then, data and base map were extracted from documents and master or detailed plan of Tehran and considering the Geographic data bank related to each sub-criteria in GIS, input layer of each of them has been provided. In next step, thematic Map of vulnerability of the case study based on every sub-criteria has been mapped out and at the end of this step, all of these map has been overlaid in order to identify case study vulnerability.
Result and Conclusion
The results show that population distribution criteria (weight: 0.230), physical characteristics of the body and form (weight: 0.221), and user compatibility (weight: 0.147) obtained the highest weight among vulnerability criteria, and 68% of the sample level It has a moderate upward vulnerability to military threats. Also, the most important strategies to reduce vulnerability to military threats were, respectively, the development of multi-user applications in the area of organising cultural and religious uses (W7O8), organising and locating green and open spaces in the area for defining crisis support centres. (W6O5) And attention is given to creating safe spaces within the (S4O4) area. In addition some strategies can be useful in order to Reduce the Impact of Military Threats such as regeneration and redevelopment with emphasis on residential area which is located in north and west of the site, safe spaces development, restriction of trans-regional land uses, reduction of sensitive land uses, developing emergency land uses, eliminating incompatibility of land uses in the area, sending out the harmful land uses and developing multi-functional land uses.
The results show that population distribution criteria (weight: 0.230), physical characteristics of the body and form (weight: 0.221), and user compatibility (weight: 0.147) obtained the highest weight among vulnerability criteria, and 68% of the sample level It has a moderate upward vulnerability to military threats. Also, the most important strategies to reduce vulnerability to military threats were, respectively, the development of multi-user applications in the area of organising cultural and religious uses (W7O8), organising and locating green and open spaces in the area for defining crisis support centres. (W6O5) And attention is given to creating safe spaces within the (S4O4) area. In addition some strategies can be useful in order to Reduce the Impact of Military Threats such as regeneration and redevelopment with emphasis on residential area which is located in north and west of the site, safe spaces development, restriction of trans-regional land uses, reduction of sensitive land uses, developing emergency land uses, eliminating incompatibility of land uses in the area, sending out the harmful land uses and developing multi-functional land uses.
Keywords: passive defence, Military threats, Vulnerability zoning, District One in Tehran's Eleventh Region

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Alexander, D., 2002, From Civil Defence to Civil Protection and Back Again, Disaster Prevention and Management, 11 (3), 209-213.
  2. Asgari, A.; Parizgar, A. and Ghadiri, M.A., 2002, Application of Urban Planning Methods (land use) to Reduce the Vulnerability of Earthquake Hazards to GIS (Case Study: Tehran District 17), Geographic Journal, 17 (4), 63-78.
  3. Abdollahi, M., 2004, Crisis Management in Urban Areas, Proceedings of the Conference on Urban Development Issues, Shiraz University, Iran
  4. Azizi, M.M. and Akbari, R., 2008, Urban Considerations in Assessing the Vulnerability of Cities to Earthquakes (Case Study, Farahzad Area, Tehran), Fine Arts magazine, 34, 25-36.
  5. Amini, H.; Asadi, S. and Bornafar, M., 2010, Evaluation of the Structure of the Langrood City for the Non- Proactive Defense Planning, Journal of Applied Geosciences Research, 15 (18), 129-149.
  6. Aminzadeh, B. and Adali, Z., 2014, Measuring the Vulnerability of Urban Tissues in the Event of an Earthquake Crisis (Case Study: Qazvin's districts), Hovyat Shahr Magazine, 8 (20), 5-16.
  7. Bahraini, S.H., 1999, Role of form, Pattern and Size of Settlements in Reducing the Risks of Earthquake, Settlement Foundation Publication, Tehran.
  8. Brandon, P., 2011, Extreme Management in DisasterRecovery, Journal of Procedia Engineering, 14, 14-21.
  9. Darrypour, N.; Moradi, A. and Mansouri, Z., 2016, Measuring the Vulnerability of Urban Utilities in Military threats by Combining Methods GIS & PROMETHEE (Case Study: Ahwaz City), Fourth Scientific Congress of the New Horizons in the field of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Culture and Urban Management of Iran.
  10. Eckert, N.; Parent, E.; Faug, T.and Naaim, M., 2008, Optimal Design under Uncertainty of A Passive Defense Structure against Snow Avalanches: fromA General Bayesian Framework to a Simple AnalyticalModel, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 8 (5), 1067-1081.
  11. Fredro, M., 2008, Nonprofit Defense Preparedness Strategy in Non- Proactive Defense Theory, Abbasi Publishing House, Tehran
  12. Francis, R. and Bekera, B., 2014, A Metric and Frameworks for Resilience Analysis of Engineered and Infrastructure Systems, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 121(46),90-
  13. Hossein Zadeh Delir, K.; Maleki, K.; Shefaati, A. and Heydarifar, M., 2012, Non- Proactive Defense and Sustainable Urban Development with an Emphasis on Threatening Uses of the Metropolis of Tabriz from the Perspective of War, Geography and Environmental Sustainability Magazine, 2(5), 1-24.
  14. Hataminejad, H. and Azimzadeh Irani, A., 2015, Organization of Urban Neighborhood Based on Non-Operational Defense Requirements (Case Study: Neighborhoods of District 6 of 2nd region of Tehran), Geographic Information Quarterly, 24 (96), 91-112.
  15. Hosseini Amini, H.; Musazadeh, H.; Karimi, S.; Tabrizi, O. and Ghyasi, S., 2017, Analysis of Urban Vulnerability with Non-operational Defense Approach in Regional Cities (Case Study: Gorgan City), Geography Quarterly, 15 (52), 279-290.
  16. Ismaili Shahrkhat, M. and Tghvaee, A., 2011, Evaluation of City Vulnerability with Non-Proactive Defense Using the Delphi Method (Case Study: Birjand City), Urban Management Quarterly, 9 (28), 93-110.
  17. Johansson, J. and Hassel, H., 2012, Comparison of Vulnerability and Reliability Analysis of Technical Infrastructures Advances in Safety, Reliability and Risk Management-Proceedings of the European Safety and Reliability Conference, 2465-
  18. Koonce, A.M.; Apostolakis, G.E. and Cook, B.K., 2008, Bulk Power Risk Analysis: Ranking Infrastructure Elements According to their Risk Significance, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 30, 169-
  19. Khwaja Naini, A., 2009, Regional and Defense Considerations in Land Use (Regional Balance and Non-Operative Defense), Master's Thesis, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran.
  20. Khoram Abadi, M., 2011, History and Concepts of Non- Proactive Defense, Quarterly Journal of Building Engineering Organization, 36, 70-73.
  21. Kröger, W. and Zio, E., 2011, Vulnerable Systems, London: Springer London. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-0-85729-655-9.
  22. Maleki, K.; Sadr Mousavi, M.; Heydarifar, M.R.; Pahkideh, I. and Shafaati, A., 2013, Assessment of Sensitive Uses of Sanandaj City from the Passive Defense Perspective Using GIS, Geographic Law Research, 1 (1), 29-57.
  23. Mohammadpour, A.; Hamza Zarghami, A. and Zarghami, S., 2017, Investigation and Evaluation of Vulnerable Zones and Elements of the City from the Perspective of Non-Operational Defense (Case Study: Sanandaj City), Geographical Information Quarterly, 26 (102), 175-190.
  24. Nami, M.H. and Agha tahir, R., 2007, Management of Earthquake Crisis, Priority of Urban Environments, Geographic Information Quarterly, 16 (64), 11-18.
  25. Nedaee Tusi, S.; Shah Safi, A.; Ghaffar Khorzani, M. and Taheri Yeganeh, A., 2015, Physical Pathology of Tehran's Metropolitan Space Logic in terms of Non- Proactive Defense Principles, Hovyat shahr Magazine, 9 (21), 41-56.
  26. Peyman, S. and Ghazanfari, S., 2007, Secure Structure and Frameworks, Tehran, First Edition, Malak Ashtar Industrial University Press.
  27. Peck, H., 2006, Reconciling Supply Chain Vulnerability, Risk and Supply Chain Management, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 9 (2), 127-142.
  28. Pourmohammadi, M.R.; Brendkam, F.; Maleki, K. and Shefaati, A., 2012, Urban Planning Appropriate to Non-Proactive Defense with Emphasis on the Evaluation and Planning of Urban Land Use (Case Study: Sanandaj City), Geographic Information Quarterly, 21 (83), 97-107.
  29. Pourmohammadi, M.R.; Maleki, K.; Shafaati, A.; Raoof Heydarifar, M. and Karami, M.R., 2015, Non- Proactive Defense and the Necessity of Multipurpose Applications: A New Approach to the Future Development and Sustainable Urban Security, Emphasizing the Seismicity of Tabriz city, Humane Geographic Research, 47 (2), 209-231.
  30. Razavian, M.T., 2002, Urban Land Use Planning, Monshi Publications, Tehran.
  31. Rezaei, S., 2004, Geographic Location Mapping (Case Study: Bandar Abbas Harbor), 6th International Conference on Coastal, Ports and Marine Structures.
  32. Saifuddini, F., 2002, Urban Land Use Planning, Shiraz University Press, Shiraz.
  33. Sheffi, Y.; Rice, J. B.; Fleck, J. M. and Caniato, F., 2003, Supply Chain Response to Global Terrorism: A Situation Scan, EurOMA POMS Joint International Conference, Cernobbio, 1-
  34. Sharif Zadegan, M.H. and Fathi, H., 2008, Design and Application of Seismic Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis of Spatial Models and Urban Management, Journal of Sofee, 17 (46), 109-124.
  35. Steen, R. and Aven, T., 2011, A Risk Perspective Suitable for Resilience Engineering, Safety Science, 49 (2), 292-
  36. Shama'i, A.; Mostafa Pour, L. and Yousefi, M., 2015, Spatial Analysis of Vulnerability in Urban Neighborhoods with Non-Proactive Defense Approach in the City of Piranshahr, Environmental Spatial Situation Analysis, 2 (3), 105-118.
  37. Shahiwandi, A., 2017, Measuring the Vulnerability of Urban Neighborhoods in Accordance with the Principles of Non-Operational Defense (Case Study: Shahrekord), Two Quarterly Crisis Management, 6 (11), 47-62.
  38. Tayari, H., 1989, Non-Proactive Defense in 31 Countries, Book No. 15, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development of the Office of Safe Structures publishing, Tehran.
  39. Thagvaee, M. and Josie Khumsalewi, A., 2011, Investigation of Urban User Vulnerability in Walking Paths with Non-Proactive Defense Approach (Case Study: Isfahan Metropolis), Journal of Environmental Studies, (16), 125-143.
  40. Trend,, 2015, The Importance of Vulnerability Research: Recent findings. Retrieved April 7, 2016, from http://blog.trendmicro.com/the-importance-of-vulnerability-research-recent-findings.
  41. S. Department of Defense, 2012, Protection of Mission Critical Functions to Achieve Trusted Systems and Networks (TSN) (Instruction No. DoDI 5200.44). Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/520044p.pdf
  42. S. Department of Homeland Security, 2008, DHS Risk Lexicon. Retrieved from https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_risk_lexicon.pdf.
  43. Zabardast, E. and Mohammadi, A., 2005, Location of Earthquake Relief Centers Using GIS and AHP Multi-Criteria Evaluation Method, Fine Art Publishing, 21 (21), 5-16.
  44. Zargar, M. and Haji Ibrahim, S., 2008, Non- Proactive Defense in the Architecture for Reducing Resilience to Disasters, Third International Conference on Crisis Management in Natural Disasters.
  45. Zio, E.; Piccinelli, R. and Sansavini, G., 2011, An all-hazard Approach for the Vulnerability Analysis of Critical Infrastructures, 2451-2458, https://hal-supelec.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00658098.

 

 

Human Geography Research
Volume 53, Issue 4
January 2021
Pages 1209-1228

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 18 July 2019
  • Revise Date: 24 October 2020
  • Accept Date: 25 October 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics