چكيده لاتين :
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Urban areas where half the world's population lives are prone to multiple disasters. Today, globally, there are dramatic changes in attitudes toward unforeseen events; so, the prevailing view has shifted from focusing solely on reducing vulnerability to increasing resilience to disasters. According to this view, risk reduction programs should seek to create and strengthen the characteristics of resilient communities and also pay attention to the concept of resilience in the accident management chain. Going from the physical to resilience perspective, the need for a comprehensive, holistic framework and system that combines different aspects of the city with less visible but effective aspects (human behavior) creates economic, social, physical, and institutional dimensions for the issue of resilience. Moreover, special and sensitive urban centers are among the areas that are considered as vital arteries due to the complex structure of urban life and the dependence of urban society on them, and as a result, the issue of their vulnerability and resilience is very important. Because any failure in it leads to many problems for urban society, reduces the quality of life, and ultimately fails in development goals. One of the challenges of urban management in the District 11 of Tehran is the resilience of special, vital and sensitive centers. Therefore, it is necessary to take steps to achieve resilience in the region and these important centers based on components and indicators of resilience and respond properly to the needs of citizens to protect the region from possible crises and its vulnerability. In order to achieve development and reduction of sustainability. Accordingly, and considering the necessity of the subject, the present study seeks to identify the components and indicators of resilience, rank them and finally, prioritize the areas of Tehran's District 11 in terms of having components and indicators. Therefore, the main research question is as follows:
- What is the current situation of vital and sensitive special centers in the District 11 of Tehran in terms of resilience indicators?
Methodology
The present research is in the field of descriptive-analytical study in terms of content and method and applied in terms of purpose. Field and library methods have been used to collect and prepare the required information. The statistical population of this study includes a group of experts and experts in the field of geography and urban planning that available methods selected 20 people. Indices were distributed among the statistical sample in a questionnaire, which had a five-point Likert scale. Formal validity was used to assess the validity of the questionnaire, and the reliability estimate was calculated with Cronbach's alpha. The obtained alpha coefficient is equal to 0.832, which indicates good internal cohesion and high reliability. The SWARA multi-criteria weighting method was employed to analyze the obtained information and evaluate the degree of importance of each indicator. Also, WASPAS method has been exerted to determine the extent of benefit of each area of the study area.
Results and discussion
According to the data analysis, the most important physical-environmental components with a final coefficient of 0.5551, social with a coefficient of 0.2523, economic with a coefficient of 0.1262, and institutional-managerial with a coefficient of 0.064, respectively. The above studies show that focusing on the components by considering their priority will lead to the realization of resilience in the study area. Because by looking at the results, we will find that the effect of these components (either directly or indirectly) has a significant role in determining the status of the study area in terms of resilience. The status of the four areas of District 11 of Tehran among the components studied in the present study shows that area 2, with a total score of 23.2, is in the first place, and it can be acknowledged that this area is in a better position than other areas in terms of resilience indicators. Following, area 3, with a score of 67.22, is in the second rank, and area 1 with a score of 22.35 and area 4 with a score of 22.22 are in the third and fourth ranks. As the results of the WASPAS method show, the scores of the regions are close to each other. In general, all the areas have almost the same situation, and their differences are insignificant.
Conclusion
Natural and human hazards are one of the serious and worrying challenges that today's cities face in pursuing population expansion and urban boundaries more than ever before. In such a world, urban areas are the winners who, by carefully identifying and analyzing their current situation, take steps to achieve the most resilience, which is one of the new
approaches in urban management. Accordingly, the present study sought to identify the components and indicators of urban resilience, rank them and finally, prioritize areas in the District 11 of Tehran in terms of urban resilience components. In this regard, with library studies, four components and 13 indicators were identified. In the following steps, using experts' opinions and experts, the components and indicators were ranked, and finally, the areas were prioritized using SWARA and WASPAS methods. As the analysis of the findings showed, it is necessary that in the first place, the relevant authorities review and reform the existing management structures in order to achieve resilience components with emphasis on the physical-environmental dimension, which has the highest score in terms of importance among professionals, in area 4 of District 11 (according to the lowest score). This indicates the need to establish integrated management of
institutions in the region and at the national level. Therefore, according to the issues and research findings, it can be said that in order to improve the resilience of District 11 of Tehran, which is one of the most important districts of the city and the country, it is essential to establish the basis for the realization of physical-environmental, social, economic and institutional-managerial components.
