چكيده لاتين :
Good Urban Governance" can be defined as the way and procedure of handling city affairs with the cooperation and engagement of three sections, public, private and civilized society. Regarding the studied factors and practical nature of study, descriptive- explanative method is used. Data are collected with library and field studies. This study aims to evaluate 14 Area of Ilam based on Good Urban Governance criteria. Geographical range of the study is Ilam city whish has a population of 172213 in 1390. Statistical population of the study is 42613 families living in Ilam and case study is 397 head of families who are chosen based on Cochran formula and random sampling. Kronbach Alpha is used for assessing the reliability of the questionnaire which is .86. Seven factors, cooperation, accountability, responsibility, law abidance, justice, transparency and efficiency are analyzed using T-test. Analyzing date, SPSS software and one sample T-test are used. Likert scale is used to evaluate variables. Results show that the levels of all City Good Governance scales are lower than average of Likert scale based on T-test.
IntroductionThe international community, urban management has concluded that the major problem of lack of financial resources and modern technology and skilled manpower is not but before and above all, the main problem is in the method of administration of these agents. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and co- operative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest. Good urban governance, based on the principle of urban citizenship, affirms that no man, woman or child can be denied access to the necessities of urban life, including adequate shelter, security of tenure, safe water, sanitation, a clean environment, health, education and nutrition, employment and public safety and mobility. Therefore todays a procedure which is considered to be the most effective, the least expensive and the most constant is "Good Urban Governance". It can be defined as a procedure of managing municipal activities with cooperation and engagement of three sectors; public, private and civilized society in order to create a sound city with high level of living capabilities and constant development. "Good Urban Governance" must have seven characteristics as follow: 1. Accountability 2.Transparence 3.Cooperation 4. Justice and involvement 5. Comprehensiveness 6. Efficiency and effectiveness
MethedologyThis study is a descriptive- explanative one regarding studying factors and practical nature of the study. Data and information are collected with library and field studies. It is a survey study and it is done by preparing a questionnaire. Statistical population is 42613 Ilamian families and case study is 397 head of families whom are selected by Cochran formula and random sampling. Cronbach's coefficient alpha is used for reliability of questionnaire which is 0.86. Analyzing data is done by T-test method. The aim of the study is evaluating Ilam 14 areas about Good Urban Governance indexes. Geographical limit of the study is Ilam city. Its population was 172213 people and 42613 families in 1390. Participants in the study are 397 people; 297 men and 100 women. Regarding age distribution of the participants, 31 percent are under 30 years old, 36 percent 30 to 45, 22 percent 45 to 60 and 11 percent 60 or more. 45 percent have diploma degrees, 20 percent associate degrees, and 35 percent bachelor and higher degrees. 16 percent are unemployed, 27 percent have governmental jobs, 30 percent are self employed and 22 percent have other jobs. Criteria of this study are World Bank criteria and United Nation developing program. Seven factors, cooperation, accountability, responsibility, law abidance, justice, transparency and efficiency are analyzed using T-test.
Results and discussion Results show that rate of accountability is -8.340 which is meaningful in 5 percent error level. It can be said that there is a meaningful difference between real average (2.08) and imagined average (3). As the real average is lower than imagined one it can be said that from citizens' views accountability index is in an undesirable level and they evaluate it lower than Likert scale. There is a meaningful difference between real average (2.14) and imagined average (3) for responsibility level and as it is below Likert scale therefore it is in a lower level. Average for law abidance is 3.54 which is more than imagined average. Therefore the level of law abidance is high according to citizens' view. For measuring the level of cooperation, there is a meaningful difference between real (2.06) and imagined (3). Although citizens are eager to improve living condition but because of low level of assigning services to people and not caring about people opinions, they do not cooperate in urban governance. There is a meaningful difference between gained average (2.21) and imagined one (3) for transparency level and as gained one is lower than imagined, it can be said that transparency level is not satisfactory from people viewpoint. There is a meaningful difference between real average of 2.54 and imagined of 3 for justice level. People think that justice level is not in a good condition. There is a meaningful difference for effectiveness and efficiency averages and it shows that people think that they are not in a good condition. Seven factors; cooperation, responsibility, accountability, law abidance, justice, transparence and affectivity are used. Analyzing date, SPSS software and one sample T-test are used. Likert scale is used to evaluate variables. Results show that the levels of all City Good Governance scales are lower than average of Likert scale based on T-test. Therefore it can be said that Ilam 14 areas has undesirable levels according to these scales and the hypothesis of this study is confirmed.
