مقايسه ظرفيتهاي اجتماعي و نهادي توسعه پايدار در شهرهاي كرج و قزوين

Comparing Social and Institutional Capacities for Sustainable Development in the Cities of Karaj and Qazvin

با توسعه شهرها و مطرح شدن رويكرد توسعه پايدار، توجه و رعايت اصول پايداري و پيگيري اهداف آن، هرچه بيشتر در برنامهريزي توسعه شهرها مورد توجه قرار گرفته است. از آنجايي كه پيمودن اين راه بدون آگاهي از وضعيت شهرها در طي مسير امكانپذير نخواهد بود، سنجش ميزان دستيابي به اهداف توسعه پايدار در دستور كار دولتها قرار گرفته است. سنجش ميزان پيشرفت پايداري در شهرها از دو بعد اصلي محتوايي و فرايندي قابل بررسي است. بعد محتوايي شامل متغيرهايي است كه بر نتيجه نهايي سياستها تاثير ميگذارند و شامل سنجش شاخصهاي اجتماعي، اقتصادي و زيستمحيطي توسعه پايدار ميشوند. در مقابل بعد فرايندي شامل ابزار، روشها و فرايندهاي مختلفي است كه براي دستيابي به سياستهاي توسعه پايدار مورد استفاده قرار ميگيرند و به عنوان پشتيبان و محرك توسعه پايدار محسوب ميشوند. هدف تحقيق حاضر علاوه بر تبيين نظري و تشريح رابطه توسعه پايدار با سرمايه اجتماعي، سرمايه نهادي و ظرفيتسازي توسعه پايدار، ارزيابي و مقايسه شاخصهاي بعد فرايندي توسعه پايدار در دو شهر كرج و قزوين بوده است. تكنيكهاي اصلي مورد استفاده براي گردآوري دادهها، مصاحبه با مديران و كارشناسان و استفاده از پرسشنامه بوده است. به منظور تجزيهوتحليل دادهها نيز از آمار استنباطي و آزمون معناداري ميانگينها و همچنين از روش توصيفي و كيفي استفاده شده است. نتايج تحقيق نشان دهنده تفاوت معناداري بين متغيرهاي سرمايه اجتماعي، سرمايه نهادي و ظرفيتسازي در دو شهر و سطح بالاتر آنها در شهر قزوين نسبت به شهر كرج است. بدينترتيب به نظر ميرسد كه شهر قزوين جهتگيري مناسبتري در حركت به سوي توسعه پايدار در مقايسه با شهر كرج دارد.

Nowadays, more attentions have been paid on sustainability and following its goals in cities development and planning. Mentioning sustainable development principles as fundamental concepts that their main attentions are on preserving capitals for intergenerational justice, have become an ongoing and general purpose in city development plans. Since taking this route without being aware of the cities’ conditions might be impossible, evaluation of achievement of sustainable development goals has become government’s agenda. Extensive research and literature reviews have been done on assessment of sustainable development with various approaches and methods. Measuring achievements of sustainable development can be discussed from two main substantive and procedural perspectives. Substantive dimension includes the variables affecting the outcome of policies and consists of social, economic, and environmental sustainability evaluation. In fact, these variables represent the development of city. Whereas, procedural perspective refers to methods and processes of achieving sustainable development and urban planners’ role in this case is to arrange procedures and processes for sustainable decision- making. Moreover, this dimension consists of basic factors that can act as a backup and stimulus for sustainability. Considering focusing of majority of research works conducted in Iran is on substantial dimension of sustainable development, this study intended to discuss the relationship between sustainable development and social capital, institutional capital, and capacity building. In addition, we evaluated and compared procedural indicators of sustainable development in both cities of Karaj and Qazvin. Research variables were institutional capital, social capital, and capacity building. In this study, the main techniques used for data collection were interviews with experts and managers and administering questionnaire in the field. Interviews were used to collect data in capacity building indicators and questionnaires were used for social capital and institutional capital data collecting. We used Simple Random Sampling for indicators of social capital. Whereas, non-probability purposive sampling was used for institutional capital and capacity building indicators. For data analysis, the inferential statistics, descriptive and qualitative significance test means and methods were used. Our results revealed a significant difference between the variables of social capital, institutional capital, and capacity building in these cities. However, the indicators in Qazvin were in a better situation compared with Karaj. Thus, it seems that Qazvin has a better orientation in moving towards sustainable development in comparison with Karaj. Moreover, it seems that Qazvin is moving in the right path towards sustainability and has accelerated move towards sustainable development compared to Karaj.