Identifying the Factors Affecting of Establishing a Innovation District by Focusing on the Urban Regeneration of Inefficient Neighborhoods

Subject Areas : urban planning

Maryam Mahdizade Keyghobad ¹ , Hamidreza Sarmi ² , Mojtaba Rafieian ³

1 - Master's student, Department of Urban Planning, Art and Architecture, Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran.
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Art and Architecture, Teacher Education, Tehran, Iran.
3 - Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Art and Architecture, Tarbiat Madras, Tehran, Iran.

Received: 2024-09-14 Accepted : 2025-03-04 Published : 2025-08-12

Keywords: Innovation District, Regeneration, Urban Inefficient Neighborhoods, Gentrification, Delphi,

Abstract :

One of the most significant challenges facing developing countries is the increasing expansion of inefficient urban fabrics. The approach to dealing with inefficient and dilapidated urban areas has varied across different periods, unfortunately yielding unsatisfactory results in terms of their improvement. Achieving innovations and creating creative urban innovation centers has led to a novel approach to the regeneration of these inefficient urban fabrics. However, the issue remains that these innovative and creative urban centers have also failed to make a significant impact on these urban areas. Innovation districts are emerging as place-based and knowledge-driven urban development strategies in various cities worldwide. However, they have faced criticism for top-down, non-participatory initiatives that encourage gentrification, which ultimately increases the gap between the rich and the poor. Evidence from the United States indicates that gentrification policies aimed at improving conditions for all classes have been ineffective. In fact, the effects of gentrification may reduce the survival chances of smaller manufacturing businesses that provide essential job opportunities for less-educated individuals. Therefore, there is an urgent need for community-based policies and actions that prevent the potential displacement of the most vulnerable economic stakeholders and resident groups. Consequently, to avoid gentrification, this research aims to identify the factors affecting the creation of innovation districts with a focus on the Urban Regeneration of inefficient neighborhoods. In this study, 22 influential factors were initially identified through a thorough literature review and content analysis. Subsequently, the Delphi method was employed in two rounds to screen and identify these factors comprehensively. The members of the Delphi panel were selected through non-probability sampling, utilizing a combination of purposive and snowball methods. This panel consisted of researchers or practitioners in the fields of urban innovation districts, urban Regeneration, or both. A semi-structured questionnaire was used for this research, with closed and open questions analyzed using SPSS and Atlas-Ti software, respectively. Based on the results obtained from SPSS, the factor of affordable housing was eliminated. From the open-ended coding results in Atlas-Ti, 21 codes were extracted, with 14 codes overlapping with factors in the closed questions, resulting in a total of 7 new factors being recognized. Ultimately, 28 factors were identified: 9 factors in the physical and environmental dimension, 12 factors in the social and network dimension, and 7 factors in the economic dimension. In the second round of Delphi, all factors received high scores, and none of the factors were eliminated. According to the results from this round, in the physical dimension, factors such as utilizing land and buildings with redevelopment potential and equitably distributing urban services and infrastructure received high scores. In the social and network dimension, factors like empowering local communities (especially vulnerable groups), fostering connections between local communities and newcomers, ensuring mutual benefits, and nurturing local talents scored highest. In the economic dimension, creating and attracting new financial resources and developing local economic development (LED) received the highest scores. These identified factors significantly impact inclusion and play an important role in preventing gentrification in urban settings

References:

1. ابیلی، خدایار؛ حسنی، سیدحمزه؛ و صاحبکارخراسانی، سیدمحمد. (1401). شناسایی و تبیین مولفه های مفهوم ناحیه نوآوری با فرا ترکیب پیشینه. مطالعات راهبردی سیاست گذاری عمومی، 12(43)، 2-27. https://sspp.iranjournals.ir/article_251755.html
2. تاجیک، زهره؛ پورموسوی، سید موسی؛ و سرور، رحیم . (1402). تحلیلی بر چالش‌های توسعه محلی مبتنی بر بازآفرینی اقتصاد پایدار شهری مطالعه موردی: شهر تهران. شهر پایدار، 6 (2) ، 111-132. https://www.jscity.ir/article_166825.html
3. جعفر، علیرضا؛ اکبری، مرتضی؛ و داوری، علی. (1399). عوامل مؤثر بر شکل گیری خوشه‌های نوآوری؛ مطالعه ناحیه نوآوری شریف. سیاست علم و فناوری، 13(1), 14-1. https://jstp.nrisp.ac.ir/article_13778.html
4‌ دفتر مقررات‌ ملی ‌و‌ کنترل ‌ساختمان و شرکت‌ بازآفرینی ‌شهری ‌ایران. (1397). بازآفرینی شهری پایدار در محدوده‌ها و محله‌های ناکارآمد شهری. تهران: نشر توسعه ایران.
5. رضایی، مریم؛ ابراهیم زاده، عیسی؛ و رفیعیان، مجتبی. (1395). سنجش عوامل مؤثر در رهاشدگی اراضی شهر ایلام در راستای دستیابی به پایداری شهری. پژوهش های جغرافیای برنامه ریزی شهری، 4(2)، 153-173. https://jurbangeo.ut.ac.ir/article_59158.html
6. رفیعیان، مجتبی. (1400). ناحیه نوآوری شهری از نظریه تا عمل: انتشارات دانشگاه تربیت مرس.
7. عسگری، امیر؛ خورسندی طاسکوه، علی؛ غیاثی ندوشن، سعید؛ قاضی نوری، سیدسروش؛ و خیاطیان یزدی، محمدصادق. (1400). بیان ماهیت و ارایه مدل استقرار ناحیه نوآوری: پژوهشی فراترکیب با استفاده از متن کاوی. رهیافت، 31(81)، 21-41. https://rahyaft.nrisp.ac.ir/article_13883.html
8. بزرگ زاده کلوری، سیده معصومه؛ پورموسوی، سیدنادر؛ و وثیق، بهزاد. (1399). بازآفرینی بافت فرسوده شهری با تاکید براقتصاد خلاق (مطالعه موردی: محله بازار شهر دزفول). هویت شهر، 14(2)، 19-30. https://sanad.iau.ir/fa/Article/794264
9. مشایخی، علینقی؛ فرهنگی، علی‌اکبر؛ مؤمنی، منصور؛ و علیدوستی، سیروس. (1400). بررسی عوامل کلیدی مؤثر بر کاربرد فناوری اطلاعات در سازمان‌های دولتی ایران: کاربرد روش دلفی. پژوهش های مدیریت در ایران، 9(20)، 191-232. https://www.sid.ir/paper/427130/fa
10. رسول نازی، سمیه، نقیبی، فریدون، و خسرونیا، مرتضی. (1401). بررسی نقش ظرفیت های مردمی و محلی در بازآفرینی بافت ناکارآمد شهری (نمونه موردی: بافت فرسوده ارومیه). پژوهش‌های جغرافیای انسانی، 54(1)، 131-154. https://jhgr.ut.ac.ir/article_78730.html
11. نیکینا، آنا؛ پیکه، جوزپ؛ و سنز، لوییس. (1398). نواحی نواوری در عرصه‌ جهانی مفهوم و کاربرد (هاشم آقازاده، مترجم). موسسه انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
12. Ababio, E. P., & Meyer, D. F. (2012). Local Economic Development (LED) Building Blocks, Strategy and Implementation for Local Government in South Africa. Administratio Publica, 20(4), 6-27. https://dspace.nwu.ac.za/handle/10394/11244
13. Ashour, K. N. (2016). Urban regeneration strategies in Amman's core: Urban development and real estate market. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universitätsbibliothek Dortmund.
14. Battaglia, A., & Tremblay, D. G. (2011). 22@ and the Innovation District in Barcelona and Montreal: a process of clustering development between urban regeneration and economic competitiveness. Urban Studies Research, 2011(1), 568159. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2011/568159
15. Camagni, R., & Capello, R. (2002). Milieux innovateurs and collective learning: from concepts to measurement. In The emergence of the knowledge economy: A regional perspective (pp. 15-45). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
16. Camagni, R., & Capello, R. (2009). Knowledge-based economy and knowledge creation: the role of space. In Growth and innovation of competitive regions: the role of internal and external connections (pp. 145-165). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
17. Chan, S. Y. K. (2018). Innovation, Intention and Inequities: Addressing the Potential Social Impacts of Innovation Districts in Post-Industrial Waterfront Zones Upon Working Class and Minority Neighborhoods. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University.‏
18. Dos Santos Figueiredo, Y. D., Prim, M. A., & Dandolini, G. A. (2022). Urban regeneration in the light of social innovation: A systematic integrative literature review. Land Use Policy, 113, 105873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105873
19. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research policy, 29(2), 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
20. Farelnik, E. (2015). Innovation in Urban Revitalization Programs in the Region of Warmia and Mazury. Olsztyn Economic Journal, 10(1), 85-95. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=495636
21. Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of advanced nursing, 32(4), 1008-1015. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x
22. Katz, B., & Wagner, J. (2014). The rise of innovation districts: A new geography of innovation in America. Metropolitan policy program at Brookings.
23. Kayanan, C. M. (2022). A critique of innovation districts: Entrepreneurial living and the burden of shouldering urban development. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 54(1), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X211049445
24. Kayanan, C. M., Drucker, J., & Renski, H. (2022). Innovation districts and community building: An effective strategy for community economic development?. Economic Development Quarterly, 36(4), 343-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912424221120016
25. Kuriakose, P. N., & Philip, S. (2021). City profile: Kochi, city region-Planning measures to make Kochi smart and creative. Cities, 118, 103307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103307
26. Lawrence, S., Hogan, M., & Brown, E. G. (2019). Planning for an innovation district. RTI press.
27. McKenna, H. P. (1994). The Delphi technique: a worthwhile research approach for nursing?. Journal of advanced nursing, 19(6), 1221-1225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01207.x
28. Monardo, B. (2018). Innovation districts as turbines of smart strategy policies in US and EU. . Boston and barcelona experience. In International Symposium on New Metropolitan Perspectives (pp. 322-335). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
29. Morisson, A., & Bevilacqua, C. (2019). Balancing gentrification in the knowledge economy: the case of Chattanooga’s innovation district. Urban research & practice, 12(4), 472-492. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2018.1472799
30. Pareja-Eastaway, M., & Pique, J. M. (2011). Urban regeneration and the creative knowledge economy: The case of 22@ in Barcelona. Journal of Urban Regeneration & Renewal, 4(4), 319-327.‏ https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/hsp/jurr/2011/00000004/00000004/art00004
31. Pique, J. M., Miralles, F., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2019). Areas of innovation in cities: the evolution of 22@ Barcelona. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 10(1), 3-25.
32. Pique, J. M., Miralles, F., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2020). Application of the triple helix model in the creation and evolution of areas of innovation. In Proceedings of the II International Triple Helix Summit 2 (pp. 223-244). Springer International Publishing.
33. Roberts, P., & Sykes, H. (1999). Urban regeneration: a handbook. Sage.
34. Swinburn, G., Goga, S., & Murphy, F. (2004). Local economic development: a primer developing and implementing local economic development strategies and action plans. World Bank Group. United States of America, 1(1).
35. Taraba, J., Forgaci, C., & Romein, A. (2022). Creativity-driven urban regeneration in the post-socialist context-The case of Csepel Works, Budapest. Journal of Urban Design, 27(2), 161-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2021.1951604
36. Wagner, J., Davies, S., Sorring, N., & Vey, J. (2017). Advancing a new wave of urban competitiveness: the role of mayors in the rise of innovation districts.