سنجش چارچوب ارزیابی سرمایه اجتماعی در ساختار شهر با تاکید بر نقش فضاهای عمومی مطالعه موردی: تهران
محورهای موضوعی : معماری
فرح حبیب
1
(دانشیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران ایران)
سید مجید نادری
2
(دانشجوی دکترای شهرسازی دانشگاه ازاد واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران ایران)
لعلا جهانشاهلو
3
(استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران ایران)
حمیده فروزانگهر
4
(دانشجوی دکترای شهرسازی دانشگاه ازاد واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران ایران)
کلید واژه: امنیت, اعتماد, سرمایه اجتماعی, شبکه های اجتماعی, مشارکت شهروندی, فضاهای عمومی شهری,
چکیده مقاله :
مقاله حاضر با هدف تبیین و شناسایی مفهوم ، "سرمایه اجتماعی" در ساختار شهری و ارائه چارچوبی برای "ارزیابی" ، در بستر مراجعه به "مستندات "و "پیمایشی توصیفی"، به ارزیابی شاخصها و سنجه های "چارچوب پیشنهادی" پرداخته است.نتایج تحقیق نشان می دهد که شاخصها و سنجه های "ارزیابی سرمایه اجتماعی" در ساختار شهری را می توان در حوزه "احساس امنیت شهروندی" ، "اعتماد و روابط متقابل" ، "مشارکت اجتماعی" و "اجتماع پذیری" و "میزان تمایل به تعاملات و معاشرتهای اجتماعی" دانست که در این میان فضاهای عمومی شهری ، دارای نقشی اساسی در بستر سازی برای "مشارکت پذیری اجتماعی" و افزایش روابط دوستانه و انسجام اجتماعی از طریق امکان دهی به مراسمات ، آیینها و جشنها و دیدارهای دوستانه بشمار می روند. علاوه بر این ، ارزیابی این شاخصها در شهر مورد مطالعه می تواند زمینه ارائه راهکارهایی در بهبود و کارامدی حوزه مداخلات برای افزایش سرمایه اجتماعی ، باشد.
The background of studies on social capital have been closely related to various aspects of development in a way that some researchers have even linked it with establishment of 'good governance', emergence and acceleration of the activities of organizational networks, and lowering the burden of local governments. A positive relation has been found in other research works between social capital on the one hand and the level of success in development plans, taking more and greater advantage of shared lands , boosting the joint action potential, improving health standards, increasing the national income, and encouraging the level of public participation in urban projects. Just like the physical capital that contributes to reshaping the raw material relying on taking advantage of tools that facilitate the production, 'human capital', too, changes the quality of the people's conduct by improving their skills and boosting their capabilities. People are thus taught to behave differently and to do their jobs more effectively. 'Social Capital', too, is in its turn accumulated when relations among the people would be subject to such evolution that they would interact more easily. Social capital is a concept without a long and detailed theoretical background. The concept was first used in academic texts and articles in 1990s and its usage has gradually increased up to the present day. That gradual increase in such fields as sociology, economy, politics, and education is indebted to research works by professors, such as James Coleman, Robert Putnam, Fukuyama, and Bourdieu. Coleman considers the 'social structure' as the generating source for the 'social capital', but reiterates, "Social capital is defined based on its functions." He believes the social capital is not a solid concept, but a combination of various factors that share two characteristics: 1) they are all different aspects of the social structure; and 2) they facilitate certain actions of the people within the social structure. Social capital, like all other forms of capital, is generative, and facilitates achieving certain goals gaining which would have been impossible in its absence. Social capital is considered as a hidden potential among society members interactions which causes most actions and behaviors in societies. The prerequisite of such phenomena is a space in which people are presented and their social interactions are created. The present article aims on codification and analysis of social capital concept in urban structure and delivering a framework towards analysis based on documentary and descriptive measurement survey and studies on the proposed framework indicators. The result of the researches show that the social capital analysis indicators in urban structure can be considered in different fields such as citizens’ sense of security, social interactions, public participation, community partnership and the amount of social interaction tension. Amongst all, the public urban spaces play the basic role in ground building for social participations and strength of social and community interactions through providing the possibility of public well-known religious and unreligious ceremonies and friendship interactions. Furthermore, the analysis of such indicators in case study provides the ground for delivering strategies in betterment and optimization of actions towards more social capital.
_افتخاری ، اصغر(1382) "نبود سرمایه اجتماعی و تاثیر آن در امنیت"، نشریه مرکز تحقیقات دانشگاه امام صادق(ع) ، شماره 11و 12.
_اوکلی ، پیتر و مارسدن ، دیوید(1370) "رهیافت های مشارکت در توسعه روستایی"، ترجمه منصور محمود نژاد ، تهران ، وزارت جهاد سازندگی .
_بوزان ، باری(1378) مردم ، دولتها و هراس، ترجمه پژوهشکده مطالعات راهبردی ، تهران.
_پوچی ، فرانکو(1377) "تکوین دولت مدرن"، ترجمه بهزاد باشی ، نشر آگه ، تهران.
_عفتی ، محمد (1371)" بررسی عوامل موثر در مشارکت روستاییان در طرح های توسعه روستایی"، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد ، تهران ، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی.
_فرهنگ عمید، (1345) ،جلداول ، انتشارات جاویدان علمی.
_فوکویاما ، فرانسیس(1382) "سرمایه اجتماعی و تحول تکنولوژیک در عصر اطلاعات (مصاحبه)" ، ترجمه علی بختیاری زاده ، نشریه مرکز تحقیقات دانشگاه امام صادق ، شماره 11و 12.
_کلمن ،جیمز(1377)" بنیادهای نظریه اجتماعی"، ترجمه منوچهر صبوری ، نشر نی ، تهران.
_گای ، دارام (1371) "توسعه مشارکتی : چشم اندازهایی از تجربه توده های روستایی" ، ترجمه عصمت قائم مقامی ، روستا و توسعه ، شماره 4 .
_میسرا ، آر.پی و چیما ، جی.شیر(1365) "مشارکت مردمی"، جهاد ، شماره 89. .
_Bourdieo, P.(1985)"Forms of Capital" .In Richards, J.C.(ed),Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, New York: Green Wood Press.
_Coleman, J.S., Doyle, W.J., (1988)" Social ties and susceptibility to the common cold", in social CAPITAL".In Dekker, P. & uslaner, E.M. (Eds) (2001) Social Capital and Participation in Everyday life, Rutledge.
_Gehl, Jan, (1987), "Life between Buildings", van Nostrand Reinhold.
_Glazer, G., (1996),"Geo-space urban design", john Willey and son, New York.
_Goodman, W, (1968)," Principles and Practice of Urban Planning", international city Managers Association, Washington.
_Hayden, D (1995),"The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History", MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Jacobs,J.(1961,1984 edition),the death and life of great American cities : the failure of modern town planning,peregrine books,London
_Langdon, P (1994),"1994)," A Better place to Live: Reshaping the American Suburb", University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst.
_Lefebvre, H, (1991),"The Production of Space", Blackwell, Oxford.
_Mitchell, D (1996),"introduction: Public space and the city", Urban Geography 17(2), pp.127_131.
_Putnam, R.D. (2000) " Bowling Alone: The collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon & Shuster.
_Putnam, R.D., (1993) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. In Uslaner, E.M. & Dekker, P. (2001)" The "Social in Social Capital".In Dekker (2001).
_Smith, L.K. (1991)"Community Participation in Health, Community Development Journal, Vol.26, pp.112_117.
_Social Analysis and Reporting Division Office for National Statistics,(2001), Social Capital: A review of the literature Social Analysis and Reporting Division Office for National Statistics, October 2001.
-Tibbalds, F (1992), "Making People Friendly Towns: Improving the Public Environments in Towns and Cities", Longman Press, Harlow,
Woolcock, Michael. 1998. “Social Capital and economic development: Toward a-theoretical analysis and policy framework”, Theory and Society. Vol. 27, P. 151-208
_||_