چكيده لاتين :
Introduction
Cities, like any other system, need to have an efficient management system to survive, which
can properly manage the components of the system. But the most important difference between
the city and other artifact systems is that each component of the system has the right to choose.
Also, every citizen is one of the components of a city with political and social rights, so should
be considered in the future development of the city. Given that Iranian cities are currently facing
many management problems. A natural accident can completely disrupt their performance.
Challenges in the urban management system have led to the emergence of different theories in
this regard, each of which attempts to suggest a suitable model by taking into account a series of
variables and criteria. The 1970s was a turning point in the theorizing. Among these, one can
mention two urban governance and urban resilience theories. Almost both theories were raised
at one time, but several decades of time were needed to develop by the experts, until take a more
complete form. Each of these theories will try to provide appropriate solutions to the challenges
of urban management and to come up with a suitable model in this regard. The purpose of this
study is to identify effective variables and criteria in these two theories and compare them with
each other in order to better understand the subject and provide a more efficient model for urban
management in Qazvin.
Methodology
In this research, content analysis method has been used, reviewing more than one hundred
articles, books and reports that have been published in two fields of governance and resilience in
Persian and English languages, finally about 60 selected sources have been selected and
evaluated. The selected resources are divided into two general sections, one focusing on
resilience and the other on governance. Then, each section is divided into two sub-categories,
including Persian and English sources, and the variables and criteria mentioned in them are
extracted. Finally, after analyzing the content of the obtained information, the results of the two
general sections are compared with each other.
Result and Discussion
According to the findings of the present study, institutional resilience with a broader view has
looked at the factors influencing urban management and the variables that play a role in
improving the efficiency and performance of this system. Therefore, it can be said that
institutional resilience is more comprehensive than urban governance, and by combining these
two theories, more efficient urban management can be achieved. According to the content study,
with the realization of a resilient urban management system, the variables of urban governance
can be considered simultaneously.
Conclusion
According to the analysis of the findings, an upgraded conceptual model can be presented by
considering all the criteria and variables proposed in these two theories, according to the crisis
management situation in Qazvin. In this upgraded model, criteria’s are include six criteria based
on resilient ideas (which are Autonomous, Sustainability, preparation, flexibility, Rehabilitation
& Reflection) and three criteria derived from governance theories (which are Purposefulness,
transparency and justice) and six common criteria (which are interconnected, Accountability,
Comprehensiveness, Participation, Legitimacy, Efficiency) and ten variables were selected as
independent variables.
Independent variables include People, NGOs, Rules and Regulations, Local Government,
National Government, Urban Infrastructure, Relief and Rescue Bases, Information Bank, Alert
System and Private sector. In the contemporary period, dealing with the crisis in Iran, such as
the urban management system, has had its ups and downs. What is now known as the Crisis
Management Headquarters is based on the Iranian Crisis Management Law, which was passed
in 2007. The law proposes a centralized institution. The head of the Qazvin Crisis Management
Headquarters is the governor
In this model, it has been tried to solve the problems in the Iranian urban management system,
which involves the interference or parallel work of various institutions. According to the Crisis
Management Act in Iran, fourteen workgroups have been set up to deal with accidents. The
responsibility of each workgroup is with a government agency. Unfortunately, the variables
affecting each group are not mentioned in this law. So some of them may not be sufficiently
considered.
In the proposed model, the variables that can be influential in each workgroup are introduced.
The name of each workgroup and its variables is as follows:
1. Earthquake and landslide workgroup (People, Rules and Regulations, Local Government,
National Government, Urban Infrastructure, Relief and Rescue Bases, Information Bank, Alert
System.)
2. Information and Communication Technology workgroup (Rules and Regulations, Local
Government, Urban Infrastructure, Information Bank, Alert System)
3. Healthcare workgroup (Rules and Regulations, Local Government, Relief and Rescue Bases,
Information Bank, Alert System.)
4. Agricultural hazards workgroup (People, NGOs, Rules and Regulations, Local Government,
Information Bank, Alert System.)
5. Transportation workgroup (NGOs, Rules and Regulations, Local Government, National
Government, Urban Infrastructure, Information Bank, Alert System.)
6. Insurance and reconstruction workgroup (People, Rules and Regulations, Local Government,
Information Bank, Relief and Rescue Bases, Alert System.)
7. Security workgroup (Rules and Regulations, Local Government, Relief and Rescue Bases,
Information Bank, Alert System.)
8. Flood and maritime hazards workgroup (People, Rules and Regulations, Local Government,
Urban Infrastructure, Relief and Rescue Bases, Information Bank, Alert System.)
9. Fuel supply workgroup (Rules and Regulations, Local Government, Urban Infrastructure,
Information Bank, Alert System.)
10. Home supply workgroup (People, Rules and Regulations, Local Government, Information
Bank, Alert System.)
11. Environmental hazards workgroup (People, NGOs, Rules and Regulations, Local
Government, National Government, Relief and Rescue Bases, Information Bank, Alert System.)
12. Education and information workgroup (People, Rules and Regulations, Local Government,
Information Bank, Alert System.)
13. Rescue workgroup (People, NGOs, Rules and Regulations, Local Government, National
Government, Urban Infrastructure, Relief and Rescue Bases, Information Bank, Alert System.)
14. NGOs (People, Rules and Regulations, NGOs, Information Bank, Alert System.)
In this way, each workgroup can empower its variables according to the criteria proposed.
