Comparison and Analysis of Urban Housing Poverty Indicators according to Geographical Distribution (Case Study: Bijar City)

جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری

Volume 11, Issue 3, December 2024, Pages 131-153   

Document Type: Original Article

DOI: 10.22067/jgusd.2023.78037.1234

Authors

Sedigheh Lotfi^{* 1}; Behnaz Mohamayari²; Mohammad Soleymani³; Sirvan Maleki⁴

¹Department of Geography & Urban Planning, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

²M.A. at Urban Spatial Planning, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

³Department of Geography and Rural Planning, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

⁴Department of Civil Engineering, University of Alborz, Abyek Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

Extended Abstract

Introduction

The concentration of poverty in cities is one of the most important challenges that cities face in the 21st century. Urban poverty has been discussed by several sociologists, economists and politicians for more than a century. A good and sufficient housing means a housing that does not have excessive density. Even in many cases, the most important factors influencing a person’s satisfaction with living in a neighborhood are housing and environmental conditions. Housing is one of the main factors of reducing poverty and class difference between different social strata. One of the positive consequences of this matter is the stability and solidarity of families. Housing is also effective in the families’ participation in the bigger society. Lack of access to suitable housing is so connected with the increase of crime, divorce, and social disunity, and it becomes a hindering factor in social growth and development. Not having a home causes the emergence of other abnormal social phenomena such as sleeping on the streets, slum dwelling, and more serious problems such as begging. Low-income social groups have always faced problems in providing housing. Average size of the household, the density in the residential unit, the density of people in the residential unit, etc. are high in places where these groups live. Therefore, these people have no choice but to fall into the cycle of poverty. Therefore, it is necessary to study these areas by carefully evaluating the housing indicators.

Method

This study used a descriptive-analytical method. Documentary sources were studied to establish theoretical background, and the required data was extracted from the statistical blocks of Bijar in 2006 and 2016 from Iran Statistics Center. Bijar is one of the cities of Kurdistan province, which is located in the northeast of Kurdistan and in the west of Iran. According to the census of 2016, the city had a population of 56,857 and according to the latest master plan of the city, it consisted of 20 neighborhoods. Factor analysis was applied in SPSS to analyze the indicators for 2006 and 2016. GIS was used to visualize the zoning map related to the housing poverty. Then, the indicators were transferred to the SPSS and, using the factor analysis model, 12 indicators were classified into two factors. For each of the specific value factors, variance percentage and cumulative variance were explained. According to each of the extracted factors, the blocks of the city were categorized into five groups: very prosperous, prosperous, average, poor, and very poor.

Results

The findings indicated that the final factor in 2006 regarding to the poverty zone included 41.43% of the city area, 54.91% of the population and 56.03% of the households, which is in the central parts of Boulevard, the southwestern part of Badamestan and Farhi, the southern part of Sarab neighborhoods. The moderate zone marked with yellow color is scattered in different parts of the city and included 19.71% of the area, 24.24% of the population and 23.97% of the households. Refah zone with 83.83% of the area, 20.82% of the population and 19.98% of the households are included in the areas in the eastern parts of Yaramjeh, the northeast of Takht Sofla and Takht Olya, Mahdiyeh and the northwest of Halvai neighborhoods. In 2016, the poverty zone with 34.29% of the city's area, 67.16% of the population and 68.09% of the households included the northern parts of Almasieh, the eastern part of Yaramjeh, and the southeast of Rig Siah neighborhoods. The moderate poverty zone, which is marked with yellow color, with 17.25% of the area, included 22.22% of the population and 21.51% of the households, which is located in the center parts, namely the Boulevard neighborhood, the southwestern part of Badamestan and Farahi neighborhoods. Refah zone with 48.44% of the city area, 10.6% of the population, and 10.37% of the households are included among the zones that are located in the northeastern parts of Takht Sofla neighborhoods. It also included the upper and northwest of Halvai neighborhoods.

Discussion and Conclusion

The issue of housing poverty and its impacts on the socio-economic status of urban population has become more significant in recent decades in the urban policies of the countries in the world, especially in developing countries. As discussed above, urban poverty is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that has faced planners and policy makers with many challenges. In the present study, in order to run factor analysis, GIS and SPSS were applied. The aim was to depict the changing situation of city neighborhoods of Bijar in two different years. The results of the integration of the indicators showed that the poverty zones in 2006 and 2016 shifted in different parts of the city. In 2006 they were the central parts of Boulevard, the southwestern part of Badamestan and Farahi, and the southern part of the city of Sarab neighborhoods, but 2016 poverty zones were located in most areas of the northern parts which included in the eastern parts of Yaramjeh, the northeast of Takht Sofla and Takht Olya neighborhoods. Moreover, it can be said that the total percentage of the poverty zones has increased over the 10 years and the poverty zone became more widespread in Bijar especially in the northern parts.
 

Keywords

Keywords: Housing Poverty; Urban Neighborhoods; Factor Analysis; Socio-Economic Dimensions; Bijar City

References

1. اطهاری، ک. (1384). فقر مسکن در ایران (فقر سیاست های اجتماعی). فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی رفاه اجتماعی، 5(18)، 127-113.
2. بنی فاطمه، ح.، و ایرانی، س. (1389). بررسی تطبیقی میزان فقر در مناطق مختلف شهر تبریز. مجله مطالعات جامعه شناسی، 3(7)، 22-7.
3. پور احمد، ا.، گروسی، ع. ر.، و نوری، ا. (1394). ارزیابی شاخص های مسکن شهرستان نظرآباد با رویکرد شهر سالم و فصلنامه برنامه ریزی کالبدی فضایی، 2(4)، 33-21.
4. پورمحمدی، م.، نعیمی، ک.، درویشی، ف. (1395). تحلیل کیفیت مسکن در محلات 20 گانۀ شهر بیجار با روش آنتروپی و SAW.جغرافیا و آمایش شهری منطقه‌ای، 6(19)، 122-107.
5. پورموسوی، س. م.، امینی، م.، و کیخا، م. (1392). بررسی تأثیر اقتصاد سیاه بر فقر در مناطق شهری ایران. مجله برنامه ریزی و آمایش فضا، 17(3)، 62-45.
6. روستایی، ش.، رحمتی، خ.، و شیخی، ع. (1395). توزیع فضایی و پهنه بندی فقر شهری بر پایه مولفه های اجتماعی اقتصادی و کالبدی مطالعه موردی شهر میاندوآب. فصلنامه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری چشم انداز زاگرس، 8(30)، 471-449.
7. روستایی، ش.، احد نژاد، م.، اصغری زمانی، ا.، زنگانه، ع.ر.، و سعیدی ، ش. (1394). ارزیابی فقر ارزیابی فقر شهری در مناطق اسکان غیررسمی شهر کرمانشاه با استفاده از الگوی تحلیل عاملی (مطالعه موردی: محلات دولت آباد و شاطر آباد در سال 1385). مجله جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی، 19(53)، 166-136.
8. زبردست، ا.، و رمضانی، ر. (1395). سنجش فقر شهری و ارتباط آن با دسترسی به خدمات شهری در شهر قزوین. نشریه هنرهای زیبا- معماری و شهرسازی، 21(2)، 54-45.
9. صارمی، ح.ر.، و ابراهیم پور، م. (1391). بررسی شاخص های مسکن ایران و جهان، مطالعه موردی ایران انگلیس و فرانسه. مجله هویت شهر، 6(10)، 102-91.
10. عزیزی، م.م. (1382). تراکم در شهرسازی: اصول و معیارهای تعیین تراکم شهری، وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی. چاپ اول. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
11. عزیزی، م.، موحد، ع.، ساسانپور، ف.، و کرده، ن. (1393)، تحلیلی بر وضعیت فقر شهری مطالعه موردی شهر مهاباد. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی اطلاعات جغرافیایی سپهر، 23(90)، 69-60.
12. غلامی، ع.ر.، و مهدنژاد، ح. (1400). تحلیل فضایی فقر شهری از لحاظ شاخص های کالبدی در کلان شهر اصفهان. فصلنامه علمی پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهری، 12(44)، 38-21.  
13. لطفی، ص.، و حسنعلی زاده، م. (1399). تحلیل فضایی فقر شهری در فضاهای شهری مطالعه موردی: شهر نورآباد. پژوهش های دانش زمین، 11 (41)، 168-152.
14. معصوم نیا بیشه، ع.، و برک پور، ن. (1393). تحلیل روند تغییرات شاخص های تراکم و سرانه فضای مسکونی. نشریه صفه. 24(64)، 94-75.
15. مرکز آمار ایران. (1385). بلوک های آماری شهر بیجار. اهران: مرکز آمار ایران.
16. مرکز آمار ایران (1395). بلوک های آماری شهر بیجار. تهران: مرکز آمار ایران.
17. موحد، ع.، ولی نوری، س.، حاتمی نژاد، ح.، زنگانه، ا.، و کمانرودی کجوری، م. (1395). تحلیل فضایی فقر شهری در کلانشهر تهران. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی اقتصاد و مدیریت شهری، 4(15)، 37-19.
18. نجاتی، ص.، علوی، س. ع.، و قائد رحمتی، ص. (1397). تحلیل فقر مسکن شهری از بعد اجتماعی (مطالعه موردی: محلات منطقه 17 شهر تهران). دو فصلنامه جغرافیای اجتماعی شهر، 5(2)، 106-87.
19. نیک پور، ع.، آنامراد نژاد، ر.ب.، و ملاحسینی، ع. ا. (1396). سطح بندی محلات براساس شاخص های کمی و کیفی مسکن (مورد مطالعه شهر بابلسر). فصلنامه مطالعات ساختار و کارکرد شهری، 4(15)، 123-100.
20. نیک پور، ع.، سلیمانی، م.، اکبری، ف.، و محمدیاری، ب. (1400). مقایسه و تحلیل سطح پایداری محله های شهری (مورد مطالعه: شهر بجنورد). دو فصلنامه توسعه پایدار محیط جغرافیایی، 3(5)، 50-36.
21. نیک پور، ع.، سلیمانی، م.، و محمدیاری، ب. (1400). تحلیل فضایی پویش فقر شهری و پهنه بندی آن در کلان شهر رشت. نشریه علمی مطالعات برنامه ریزی سکونتگاه های انسانی. 16(2)، 352-359.
22. وارثی، ح. ر.، و کمال باغراهی، ا. (1394). تحلیل شاخص های کمی و کیفی مسکن در شهر جیرفت و پیشبینی مسکن مورد نیاز تا سال 1400. نشریه جغرافیای اجتماعی شهری مطالعات نواحی شهری سابق، 2(4)، 249-125.
23. یزدانی ، م.ح .، و ﮐﯿﺎﻧﯽ، س .(1395) . بررﺳﯽ و ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ وﺿﻌﯿﺖ ﻣﺴﮑﻦ (ﺷﺎﺧﺺ ﻫﺎی ﮐﻤﯽ و ﮐﯿﻔﯽ ﻣﺴﮑﻦ) نقاط شهری استان اردبیل، سومین کنفرانس علمی و پژوهشی افق های نوین در علوم جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی معماری و شهرسازی ایران. 10-1.

 

24. Baker, J. (2009). Meeting the Challenge of Urban Poverty and Slums. Ghana: World Bank.
25. Bogdon, A.S., & Can, A. (1997). Indicator of Housing Affordability Comparative and Spatial Approaches. Real Estate Economics, 25(1), 43-80.
26. Chen, M., Zhang, H., Liu, W., & Zhang, W. (2014). The global pattern of urbanization and economic growth. Evidence from the last three decades. Plos One, 9(8), 1-14.
27. Conteh, A., Earl, G., Liu. B., & Roca. E. (2020). A new insight into the profitability of social housing in Australia. A Real Options approach. Habitat International, 6(2), 1-15.
28. Curley, A. (2005). Theories of urban poverty and implications for public housing policy. Soc. & Soc. Welfare, 32(2), 97-119.
29. Douglas, H.W., Yi, J., & Zhang, B. (2019). House prices and marriage entry in China. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 74(6). 118–130.
30. Ferreri, M., Dawson, G., & Vasudevan. A. (2017). Living precariously: Property guardianship and the flexible city. Inst. Brit. Geogr, 42 (2). 246–259.
31. Glaeser, E., & Gyourko, J. (2005). Urban decline and durable housing. Journal of Political Economy, 113(2), 345-375.
32. Ha, S.K. (2004). Housing poverty and the role of urban governance in Korea. Environment and Urbanization, 16(1), 139-154.
33. Kalantidou, E. (2020). Housing precariousness: The need for and feasibility of sustainable housing in Australia. Journal of Geoforum, 12(3).
34. Kanbur, R., & Sumner, A. (2012). Poor countries or poor people? Development assistance and the new geography of global poverty. Journal of International Development, 24(6). 686–695.
35. Kuddus, M. A., Tynan, E., & McBryde, E. (2020). Urbanization: a problem for the rich and the poor? Public Health Reviews, 41(1), 41-1.
36. Liu, R., Kuffer, M., & Persello, C. (2019). The temporal dynamics of slums employing a CNN-based change detection approach. Remote Sensing, 11(23), 28-44.
37. Ma, J., Dong, G., Chen, Y., & Zhang. W. (2018). Does satisfactory neighbourhood environment lead to a satisfying life? An investigation of the association between neighbourhood environment and life satisfaction in Beijing. Cities, 74(2). 229–239.
38. Martine, G. (2012). The new global frontier: urbanization, poverty and environment in the 21st century. Earthscan, 5(2), 220-228.
39. Mekonen, E. K. (2022). The effect of residential house rent on urban households poverty status in Ethiopia: evidence from Wolkite town. Cogent Economics & Finance, 10, 2125659.
40. Nakabashi, L. (2018). Poverty and economic development: Evidence for the Brazilian states. Economia, 19 (3), 445-458.
41. Noble, M., Barnes, H., Wright, G., & Roberts, B. (2010). Small area indices of multiple deprivation in South Africa. Social Indicators Research, 95(11).
42. Odekon, M. (2010). Encyclopedia of world poverty. New York: Thousand Oaks.
43. H. (2006). Housing inequality and housing poverty in urban China in the late 1990s. China Economic Review, 17(1). 37-50.
44. Simler, K., Harrower, S., & Massingarela, C. (2004). Estimating poverty indices from simple indicator surveys. In conference on Growth, Poverty Reduction and Human Development in Africa. Centre for the Study of African Economies. University of Oxford. 21 (3).
45. Wang, J., Kuffer, M., Roy, D., & Pfeffer, K. (2019). Deprivation pockets through the lens of convolutional neural networks. Remote Sensing of Environment. 6(3), 234- 242.
46. Westaway, M. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of satisfaction with personal and environmental quality of life in an informal South African housing settlement, Doorkop, Soweto. Habitat International, 30(3), 175-189.
47. White, H. (1999). Global poverty reduction: Are we heading in the right direction? Journal of International Development, 11(4), 503–519.
48. Zainal, N. R., Gurmit, K., Nor Aisah, A., & Jamaliah, M. Kh. (2012). Housing conditions and quality of life of the urban poor in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15(50), 827–838.