An Analysis of Social Sustainability in the Interactive Relationship between Citizens and Urban Management Using the Factor Analysis Method (Case Study: Isfahan Citizens)

جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری

Volume 9, Issue 4 - Serial Number 19, February 2023, Pages 39-54   

Document Type: Scientific-Research

DOI: 10.22067/jgusd.2022.69681.1028

Authors

shohreh ezzatian^{* 1}; behnaz aminzade²

¹PhD Researcher in Urbanism, Urban Planning Department, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

²Professor in Urban Planning Department, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Social sustainability that is affected by social and institutional components includes various indicators. One of this components is creating interactive relationship between citizens and social institution in civil society. The dynamic of this relationship is formed via social institutions and groups’ activities. Urban management can be a facilitator and intermediary institution between citizens and government. In order to realize the social sustainability, it seems that we need to create an interactive relationship between citizens and urban management. The aim of this study was developing a structural model based on the “social indicators test” in Isfahan. Using confirmatory factor analysis, it proposed a five-index model for measuring the interactive relationship between citizens and urban management. Regarding the history of implementing the cultural projects such as Citizen Culture Committee, social capital studies, etc. in Isfahan, the level of social awareness and demands among citizens is remarkable. 1806 citizens were selected in different groups from all neighborhoods of Isfahan to check this pseudo-theory. There are influencing factors that strengthen the relations between citizens and urban management in five indicators. A factor model is drawn in Amos software and the pseudo-theory is tested by a questionnaire in order to confirm or reject the proposed pseudo-theory. The results showed that the value of CMIN/DF is 3.13, the value of CFI is 0.942, and the value of RMSEA is 0.034. All the results indicated that the structural model of this study is confirmed. The results showed that the indicators social participation, social awareness, social trust, social satisfaction and social demands are effective in creating an interactive relationship between citizens and urban management, so they can be used as a tool to strengthen social sustainability in the interactive relationship.

Keywords

Sustainable Urban Development; Social Participation; Social Awareness; Social Trust; Social Satisfaction and Social Demand

References

1. دانشپور، س. ع.، اسماعیل، ش.، و روستا، م. (1393). تدوین مدل ساختار عوامل مکانی موثر بر ارتقاء پایداری اجتماعی در بافت‌های فرسوده شهری به کمک تحلیل عاملی و تحلیل مسیر. نشریه مدیریت شهری. 35، 133-142.
2. سبزه‌ای، م. ت. (1389). تحلیل جامعه‌شناختی توسعه جامعه مدنی در ایران، تحلیل مقایسه‌ای دوره مشروطه با دوره انقلاب اسلامی. نشریه مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، 3(2)، 49- 85.
3. معاونت برنامه‌ریزی و توسعه منابع انسانی شهرداری اصفهان. (1390). سالنامه آماری شهرداری اصفهان. اصفهان: شهرداری اصفهان.
4. معاونت تحقیق و برنامه‌ریزی توسعه منابع انسانی، 1398، نیازسنجی مناطق شهرداری اصفهان، اصفهان: شهرداری اصفهان.
5. نسترن، م.، قاسمی، و.، و هادی‌زاده زرگر، و. (1392). ارزیابی شاخص‌های پایداری اجتماعی با استفاده از فرایند تحلیل شبکه. نشریه جامعه‌شناسی کاربردی، 3، 155-173.

 

6. Bacon , M., Christy, G., Sibella, K., & Maywa, M. (2012). The social dimensions of sustainability and change in diversified farming systems. Ecology and society,17(4), 1-20. 
7. Barron, L., & Erin, G. (2002). WACOSS Housing and Sustainable Communities Indicators Project. The Regional Institute Online Publishing.
8. Boström, M. (2012). A Missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability. Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy, 8(1), 3-14.
9. Bramley, G.N., Dempsey, N., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2006). What is sustainability and how do existing urban forms perform in nurturing it? Bartlett School: Sustainable Communities and Green Futures Conference,
10. Ciegis, R., Jolita, R., & Bronislovas, M. (2009). The concept of sustainable development and its use for sustainability scenarios. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, (2), 28-37.
11. Colantonio, A. (2008). Social sustainability: linkage research to policy and practice. Oxford: Oxford Institute for sustainable Development (OISD), Oxford Brookes University.
12. Colantonio, A., & Lane, G. (2007). Measuring social sustainability: best practice from urban renewal in the EU. Renewal, 1-37.
13. Colantonio, A., Dixon, T., Ganser, R., Carpenter, J., & Ngombe, A. (2009). Measuring socially sustainable urban regeneration in Europe. Socially Sustainable Urban Regeneration,7.
14. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable development, 19 (5), 289-300.
15. Dempsey, N., Brown, C., & Bramley, G. (2012). The key to sustainable urban development in UK cities? The influence of density on social sustainability. Progress in planning, 77(3), 89-141.
16. Department for International Development. (2007). Social urban sustainability. London: Department for International Development.
17. Gates, R., & Lee, M. (2005). Definition Social sustainability. Vancouver:
    Vancouver City Council.
18. Glasson, J., & Wood, G. (2009). Urban regeneration and impact assessment for social sustainability. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 11(4), 283-290.
19. Harris, J.M. (2003). Sustainability and Sustainable Development. International Society for Ecological Economics, 1-12.
20. Larimian, , &  Sadeghi, A. (2017). Measuring urban social sustainability: Scale development and validation, Urban Analytics and City Science, 56-58.
21. Litting, B., & Griessler, E. (2005). Social sustainability: A catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(1), 65-79.
22. Li-yin, S., & Ochao, J.J. (2011). The application of urban sustainability indicators: A comparison between various practices. Habitat International, 35, 17-29.
23. Magis, R.,S.C. (2008). Understanding the social dimension of sustainability. London: Routledge press.
24. T. (2010). Social sustainability in urban areas – Communities, Connectivity and the Urban Fabric. London, Management of Environmental Quality An International Journal, 21(6), 870-870.
25. Mckenzie, S. (2004). Social sustainability: towards some definitions. Economics journal, 12.
26. Murphy, K. (2012). The social pillar of sustainable development: A literature review and framework for policy analysis. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 8(1), 15-29.
27. Polese, M., & Stren, R. (eds.). (2000). The Social Sustainability of Cities. Diversity and the Management of Change. Toronto-Buffalo-London: University of Toronto Press.
28. Shirazi, M.R., & Keivani, R. (2017). Critical reflections on the theory and practice of social sustainability in the built environment – a meta-analysis. Local Environment, 22(12), 1526-1545.
29. Thin, N., & Lockhart, C., Yaron, G. (2002). Conceptualizing Socially Sustainable Development. Paper prepared for DFID and the World Bank, DFID. Mimeo.
30. Woodcraft, S. (2012). Social sustainability and new communities: Moving from concept to practice in the UK. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 29 – 42.
31. Yiftachel, O. & Hedgcock, D. (1993). Urban social sustainability: The planning of an Australian city. Cities, 10(2), 139-157.