بررسی و ارزیابی تاثیر توسعه اجتماعی بر دلبستگی به مکان شهروندان (مطالعه موردی: شهر رشت)
محورهای موضوعی : برنامه ریزی شهری
1 - گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه گیلان
2 - گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه گیلان
کلید واژه: توسعه, توسعه اجتماعی, دلبستگی به مکان, رشت,
چکیده مقاله :
در سال‌های اخیر، مفهوم توسعه اجتماعی در رابطه با شهرها و جوامع شهری بیشتر مورد توجه قرار گرفته است. دلبستگی می‌تواند تأثیر زیادی بر رفاه و کیفیت زندگی شهروندان، مشارکت شهروندی و پایداری شهرها که جز شاخص های توسعه اجتماعی می باشد داشته باشد. با وجود اهمیت بالای توسعه اجتماعی در شهرها، هنوز تأثیر و اهمیت آن در دلبستگی شهروندان به شهر به طور کامل مورد بررسی قرار نگرفته است. لذا پژوهش حاضر از لحاظ هدف کاربردی جهت بررسی و ارزیابی تاثیر توسعه اجتماعی بر دلبستگی شهروندان به مکان می باشد. اطلاعات بدست آمده از پرسشنامه ها توسط نرم افزار SPSS مورد تحلیل و ارزیابی قرار گرفت. با توجه به نتایج بدست آمده شاخص دلبستگی به مکان با کسب میانگین 55/3، از وضعیت مطلوبی برخوردار می باشد اما در مقابل شاخص توسعه اجتماعی با کسب میانگین 27/2، دارای وضعیت نامطلوبی در این شهر می باشد. از سویی دیگر با توجه به نتایج آزمون رگرسیون توسعه اجتماعی قادر به پیشبینی 7/31 درصد از متغیر دلبستگی به مکان شهروندان می باشد که به بیانی ساده تر توسعه اجتماعی حدود 32 درصد توان اثر گذاری را از میان تمامی عواملی که می توانند بر دلبستگی به مکان شهروندان اثر گذار باشند، دارد که این مقدار قابل توجهی می باشد لذا با هر بهبودی در شرایط اجتماعی شهر رشت شاهد افزایش دلبستگی بیشتر شهروندان به محل زندگی و شهر خود هستیم.
In recent years, the concept of social development in relation to cities and urban communities has garnered more attention. Attachment can significantly affect the welfare and quality of life of citizens, civic participation, and the sustainability of cities, which are among the indicators of social development. Despite the high importance of social development in cities, its impact and significance on citizens' attachment to their city have not been fully examined. Therefore, the current research is applied in terms of its objective to examine and evaluate the impact of social development on citizens' attachment to the place. The data obtained from the questionnaires were analyzed and evaluated using SPSS software. According to the results obtained, the index of attachment to place, with an average score of 3.55, is in a desirable state, but in contrast, the social development index, with an average score of 2.27, is in an unsatisfactory state in this city. On the other hand, according to the results of the regression test, social development can predict 31.7% of the variable of citizens' attachment to place, which simply means that social development has about a 32% impact potential among all factors that can affect citizens' attachment to place, which is a considerable amount. Therefore, with any improvement in the social conditions of the city of Rasht, we see an increase in citizens' attachment to their place of residence and city.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
In recent years, the concept of social development in relation to cities and urban communities has gained more attention. Despite the high importance of social development in cities, its impact and significance on citizens' attachment to their city have not been fully examined. On the other hand, citizens' attachment to the city includes the extent of their interest, social connections, and emotional relationship with the city and its urban living environment. This attachment can have a significant impact on the well-being and quality of life of citizens, civic participation, and the sustainability of cities, which are among the indicators of social development. Specifically, in Iranian cities that are in the process of development, fewer studies have been conducted on the impact of social development on citizens' attachment. In this regard, the aim of this article is to examine the impact of social development on the attachment of citizens to the city of Rasht and to answer the question of whether social development affects the citizens' attachment to the city of Rasht or not? And if it does have an impact, to what extent is it?
Methodology
The present research is applied in terms of its objectives and is descriptive-quantitative with regard to the method of responding to research issues. Data collection was also done through surveys and documentary methods. To examine and evaluate the impact of social development on citizens' attachment to the place, a questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale was designed, and data was collected using this method. The data obtained from the questionnaires were analyzed and evaluated using SPSS software. Then, the findings were analyzed using binomial tests and linear regression analysis. The statistical population of this research includes the residents of Rasht. In this study, to increase the reliability coefficient, a total of 425 questionnaires were completed by the residents of Rasht, both online and in person.
Results and discussion
Considering the average scores of the statements and research indicators, the statement "I have very good memories with friends/family in this city" with an average score of 4.12 has the highest average, and the statement "Citizens' participation in government decisions" with an average score of 1.39 has the lowest average among all research statements. This initially indicates that the statistical population of this research, or the citizens of Rasht, are attached to their family and friends, which subsequently suggests the existence of relatively high and desirable social relationships among the citizens of this city. The low average of the participation statement can be addressed from two perspectives: whether the lack of participation is due to the absence of infrastructure and a platform for two-way interaction between citizens and officials, or due to the lack of citizens' desire to participate in their city affairs. On the other hand, the overall index of attachment to place, with an average score of 3.55, is in a desirable state, indicating a positive and constructive interaction and relationship between the citizens and the city of Rasht. However, the social development index, with an average score of 2.27, is in an unsatisfactory state in this city. According to the results of the binomial test, in the criterion of "attachment to place," 73% of the research's statistical population feel attached to their city, indicating a relatively high level of attachment among the citizens of Rasht to their city. Also, in the criterion of "social development," 98% of the statistical population expressed dissatisfaction with the status of this index in the city of Rasht, which indicates a lack of social development in this city, a view shared by the vast majority of citizens. Finally, according to the results of the regression test, the adjusted coefficient value was 0.317, which shows that the predictor variable (social development) was able to explain about 31.7% of the variance of the dependent variable (attachment to place). In other words, social development can explain about 31.7% of the observed changes in attachment to place, which, given the obtained determination coefficient, indicates that the social development index significantly affects the attachment of the citizens of Rasht to their city.
Conclusion
according to the results of the social development regression test, we are able to predict 31.7% of the variable of citizens’ attachment to place, which is a significant amount, then with every improvement in the social conditions of the city of Rasht, we will witness an increase in the citizens’ attachment to their place of residence and city. On the other hand, considering the statements of the social development index, we realize the very low level of citizens' participation in their urban and local affairs, which is highly contemplative. Therefore, the city management should first be concerned about citizens' willingness to participate and try to enhance the interaction between officials and citizens by planning and implementing appropriate policies, such as creating neighborhood centers and public meetings, which will also lead to citizens taking responsibility for their place of residence and city. Furthermore, most citizens have expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of transparency in the management system and the inequality of individuals before the law. Economic issues and the lack of financial security are also among the most important concerns of citizens in this research, which is also the result of a lack of transparency in the country's planning system. However, among the criteria of social development, citizens have been satisfied with the state of educational justice in this city; as mentioned in the theoretical literature section of previous research, higher education is one of the most important pillars of social development because the existence of a suitable educational platform in the long term leads to an increase in citizens' awareness and ultimately their responsibility towards their living environment. In confirmation of this, it is not surprising that considering the average scores of the research statements, citizens consider themselves responsible for the environment and strive to preserve it.
1. Abdourahman, O. I. (2010). Time poverty: A contributor to women's poverty. Journal statistique africain, 11, 16-36. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof%3Aoso%2F9780199468256.003.0008
2. Abolhassan Tanhaei, H., sarookhani, B., Ghourchian, N. G., & Brahimi Ghaleh Ghazi, A. (2017). Dimensions of social development in Qeshm. Geography (Regional Planning), 6(25), 225-234. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22286462.1395.7.1.34.0 [in persian]
3. Armstrong, A., & Francis, R. (2003). Social indicators–promises and problems: a critical review. Evaluation journal of Australasia, 3(1), 17-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X0300300104
4. Azad Aramaki, T; Mubaraki, M & Shahbazi, Z. (2011). Investigating and identifying the practical indicators of social development. Social-cultural development studies. 1 (1): 7-30. [in persian]
5. Azkia, M., Zanjani, H., Barghamadi, H & Seyedmirzaie, S. M. (2015). The Study of the Level of Social Development in Tehran. Journal of Iranian Social Development Studies, 6(4), 7-21. [in persian]
6. Belanche, D., Casaló, L. V., & Orús, C. (2016). City attachment and use of urban services: Benefits for smart cities. Cities, 50, 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.08.016
7. Carvalho, A. P. S., & Bignami, F. (2019). Citizenship Education as Key Driver for Social Development: A Case Study in the City of Rio De Janeiro. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 10(6), 134-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.30845/ijbss.v10n6p15
8. Casakin, H. P., & Kreitler, S. (2008). Place attachment as a function of meaning assignment. Open Environmental Sciences Journal, 2(1), 80-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1876325100802010080
9. Conger, R. D., & Donnellan, M. B. (2007). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58, 175-199. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085551
10. Costa, R., Wang, C., & Baker, J. W. (2022). Integrating Place Attachment into Housing Recovery Simulations to Estimate Population Losses. Natural Hazards Review, 23(4), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000571
11. Daryanto, A., & Song, Z. (2021). A meta-analysis of the relationship between place attachment and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Business Research, 123, 208-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.045
12. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable development, 19(5), 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.417
13. Fazeli, M., Fatahi, S & Zanjan Rafiei, S. N. (2012). Social development, indicators and Iran's position in the world. Social-cultural development studies; 2 (1):159-182. [in persian]
14. Fouladiyan, M., Tavakkol, M., & Sohanian Haghighi, M. (2018). Investigating the Relationship between Technologic Development and Social Development Dimensions (A Comparative Study of Iranian Provinces). Journal of Social Sciences Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, 15(1), 189-220. https://doi.org/10.22067/jss.v15i1.16274 [in persian]
15. Ghanei rad M A. (2005). Social Development Approach to Poverty Reduction Programs (With a Glance to Forth Development Plan). refahj. 5(18), 223-262. [in persian]
16. Ghovati sefidsangi, A., farashiyani, H., & hasan zadeh choocanlu, H. (2017). Reflections of Social Development in Fivefold Project Law about Economy, Social and Cultural in Islamic Republic Iran from 1989-2015. Quarterly Journal of Social Development (Previously Human Development), 12(1), 151-184. https://doi.org/10.22055/qjsd.2017.13052 [in persian]
17. Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D., & Sacerdote, B. (2002). An economic approach to social capital. The economic journal, 112(483), 437-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00078
18. Hamidi, A., Salaripour, A., & Hesam, M. (2021). Evaluation of urban management policies in utilizing creative city brand, case study: Rasht city, Iran. Geographical Urban Planning Research (GUPR), 9(2), 439-461. https://doi.org/10.22059/jurbangeo.2021.314497.1412 [in persian]
19. Hamidi, A., salaripour, A., & Hesam, M. (2023). Investigating the Impact of Urban Management Measures on the Realization of the Creative City Brand (Case Study: Rasht Food Creative City). Human Geography Research, 55(4), 207-223. 10.22059/JHGR.2022.331951.1008390 [in persian]
20. Hipp, J. R., & Perrin, A. (2006). Nested loyalties: Local networks' effects on neighbourhood and community cohesion. Urban Studies, 43(13), 2503-2523. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980600970706
21. Joghataei F, Mousavi M T, Zahedi Mazandarani M J. (2017). Components and Dimensions of Social Development in Development Programs . refahj. 16(63), 55-88. [in persian]
22. Kamalipour, H., Yeganeh, A. J., & Alalhesabi, M. (2012).Predictors of Place Attachment in Urban Residential Environments: A Residential Complex Case Study. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 475-469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.111
23. Kamenev, G. K., & Kamenev, I. G. (2018). Application of the metric data analysis method to social development indicators analysis. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1809.03575
24. Lee, Y. K., Pei, F., Ryu, K. S., & Choi, S. (2019). Why the tripartite relationship of place attachment, loyalty, and pro-environmental behaviour matter?. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 24(3), 250-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2018.1564344
25. Lewicka, M. (2011). Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years?. Journal of environmental psychology, 31(3), 207-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.10.001
26. Liu, W., Liu, Z., Wang, L., Liu, H., & Wang, Y. (2022). Regional social development gap and regional coordinated development based on mixed-methods research: evidence from China. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 927011. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.927011
27. Livingston,M., Bailey, N., & Kearns, A.(2008). People’s attachment to place: the influnece of neighborhood deprivation. Project Report. Charted institute of Housing/Joseph Rowntree Foundation, coventry, Glasgow.
28. Lomas, M.J., Ayodeji, E. & Brown, P. (2024). Imagined places of the past: the interplay of time and memory in the maintenance of place attachment. Curr Psychol, 43, 2618–2629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04421-7
29. Manzo, L. C., & Perkins, D. D. (2006). Finding common ground: The importance of place attachment to community participation and planning. Journal of planning literature, 20(4), 335-350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412205286160
30. Mnatsakanyan, A., & Kuzin, V. (2018, May). Trends and features of socio-economic development of the Kaliningrad region. In International Scientific Conference" Competitive, Sustainable and Secure Development of the Regional Economy: Response to Global Challenges"(CSSDRE 2018) (pp. 61-63). Atlantis Press.
31. Molavi, M & Hamidi, A. (2023). Investigating the Impact of Citizens' Attachment on Their Participation (Case Study: Shahidan Neighborhood). Urban Structure and Function Studies, 10(37), 91-111. https://doi.org/10.22080/usfs.2023.25261.2348 [in persian]
32. Molavi, M., & Hamidi, A. (2022). Evaluating the effect of image and destination attractions on the attractiveness of tourist destinations (Case study: Rasht). Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 26(4), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2022.338230.672741 [in persian]
33. Motlaq, M., & Gandomi, M. (2017). A Study on the Level of Social Development in Khomein City. Journal of Iranian Social Development Studies, 9(2), 89-100. [in persian]
34. Moulay, A., Ujang, N., Maulan, S., & Ismail, S. (2018). Understanding the process of parks’ attachment: Interrelation between place attachment, behavioural tendencies, and the use of public place. City, Culture and Society, 14, 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2017.12.002
35. Padilla, A. M. (2006). Bicultural social development. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 28(4), 467-497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739986306294255
36. Perkins, D. D., & Long, D. A. (2002). Neighborhood sense of community and social capital. In Psychological sense of community (pp. 291-318). Springer, Boston, MA. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0719-2_15
37. Pivastegar, yaghob & akbari, zahra. (2021). Investigating the effect and relationship between attachment to place and spatial identity in indigenous and non-indigenous people in three scales: city, neighborhood and home. Urban Environmental Planning and Development, 1(3), 45-62. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.27833496.1400.1.3.4.6 [in persian]
38. Putnam, R. D. (2015). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In The city reader (pp. 188-196). Routledge.
39. Raymond, C. M., Brown, G., & Weber, D. (2010). The measurement of place attachment: Personal, community, and environmental connections. Journal of environmental psychology, 30(4), 422-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.08.002
40. Rollero, C., & De Piccoli, N. (2010). Does place attachment affect social well-being?. European Review of Applied Psychology, 60(4), 233-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2010.05.001
41. Sanson, A., Hemphill, S. A., & Smart, D. (2004). Connections between temperament and social development: A review. Social development, 13(1), 142-170. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-9507.2004.00261.x
42. Trentelman, C. K. (2009). Place attachment and community attachment: A primer grounded in the lived experience of a community sociologist. Society and natural resources, 22(3), 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920802191712
43. Ujang, N. (2012). Place attachment and continuity of urban place identity. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 49, 156-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.07.014
44. Westin, K. (2016). Place attachment and mobility in city regions. Population, Space and Place, 22(8), 722-735. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1949
45. Williams, D. R., Stewart, W. P., & Kruger, L. E. (2013). Place-based conservation: advancing social theory and practice. Place-based conservation: perspectives from the social sciences, 3-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5802-5_1
46. Yuan, Q., Song, H., Chen, N., & Shang, W. (2019). Roles of tourism involvement and place attachment in determining residents’ attitudes toward industrial heritage tourism in a resource-exhausted city in China. Sustainability, 11(19), 5151. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195151