Ranking the urban areas of Tehran in terms of poverty indicators to promote the paradigm of social security in Tehran metropolis

Subject Areas : Geography and Urban Planning

javad vakili ¹ , Azadeh Arbabi Sabzevari ² , toba amir azodi ³

1 - PhD student in geography and urban planning, Islamic Azad University, Islamshahr Branch, Islamshahr, Iran
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Geography. Islamic Azad university. Islamshahr Branch. Tehran. Iran
3 - Associate Professor, Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University, Islamshahr branch, Islamshahr, Iran

Received: 2022-12-22 Accepted : 2023-01-29 Published : 2023-10-23

Keywords: Urban Poverty, Social security, ANP model,

Abstract :

Tehran is a city of inequalities. Both poverty and wealth have grown dramatically in it. Poverty in Tehran is not completely rooted in the weak economic policies of the government, but part of it is caused by wrong urban policies. Weak population policies, especially in the matter of immigration and unrestrained marginalization, the ever-increasing expansion of informal settlements, and the lack of control and optimal management of socially disadvantaged groups at the city level, have been the most important weaknesses in the planning of urban institutions in this field, which has caused the unbridled spread of poverty in the city. . The current research is to investigate the influencing factors of urban poverty in order to improve social security. The research method is descriptive and analytical, with the ranking of urban poverty criteria and their zoning at the level of Tehran metropolis. Also, it is one of the objectives of this research to investigate the optimal strategy for reproducing social security at the level of the studied areas of Tehran, with an emphasis on urban poverty indicators. Finally, by analyzing and ranking the criteria with the ANP model and the obtained weights, and then the area The classification of factors in the examined criteria leads to the conclusion that areas 1, 3 and 2 have favorable indicators and areas 16, 17, 18 and 19 have unfavorable indicators. Finally, the promotion of social security in the identified areas should increase.