Contexts and Factors related to the Quality of Urban life in the Neighborhoods of One District of Tehran: The Application of a Multi-Level Model
Subject Areas : Neighborhood studies in Iranian Islamic citieshamid ramezani 1 , ali hatami 2 * , nader haghshenas 3 , Milad Tofangchi Mahyari 4
1 - .A of Academic Board of the Department of Architecture and Urban Landscape, Institute of Humanities and Social Studies Research, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
2 - M.A of Academic Board of the Department of Cultural Sociology, Institute of Humanities and Social Studies, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
3 - Assistant Professor of Demography, Department of Population Economics and Human Capital, National Population Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.
4 - Doctoral researcher of urban planning, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Keywords: District 1, Multi-Level Approach, Neighborhood, Quality of Urban Life, Sense of Security, Tehran.,
Abstract :
Contexts and Factors related to the Quality of Urban
life in the Neighborhoods of One District of Tehran:
The Application of a Multi-Level Model
Hamid Ramezani*
Ali Hatami**
Nader Moti Haqshanas***
Milad Tofangchi****
Research related to the quality of life has been raised as a new topic in social studies during the last fourteen decades of the 20th century in many countries. The concept of the quality of urban life today has gained traction in the schools of welfare and social justice, and in Iran since the past, various discussions and efforts have been made in the field of improving urban life quality. Therefore, in this article, using theoretical discussions and also the most important indicators in this field, the quality of life of the residents of the neighborhoods in One District of Tehran has been measured. In general, the purpose of this article is to investigate the contexts and factors related to the quality of life of the citizens of one district of Tehran, based on various indicators such as housing, transportation, security, health, and urban management. Quantitative research method and data were collected by survey method and then analyzed using HLM software with a multi-level approach. The findings of the research show that the quality of life of the residents of Region 1 varies at the neighborhood level. According to the findings, the neighborhoods of Naft, Jamaran, and Niavaran have the highest average quality of urban life, while the neighborhoods of Sohank, Derke, Zafaranieh, Darband, Evin, Gulabdara, and Mahmoudieh have the lowest average scores. Based on the differences between these neighborhoods, the findings indicate that objective variables such as age and education at level one, and subjective variables such as the feeling of social security at level two have a significant relationship with the dependent variable, i.e., quality of urban life.
Keywords: District 1, Multi-Level Approach, Neighborhood, Quality of Urban Life, Sense of Security, Tehran.
Introduction:
Quality of life is a different concept that has various definitions across different bodies of knowledge. Sociocultural environment and built environment characteristics affect people's perception of quality of life. However, there is no consensus on its definition (Serag El Din, H.; Shalaby, 2013: 9). Several studies have discussed this conceptual diversity (Wesz, J.G.B.; Miron, 2023). Conceptually, quality of life is related to social ideas, environmental quality, poverty, social inequality, social fragility, social vulnerability, sustainable development, and sustainability. Consequently, quality of life indicators should be formulated based on this domain (Pereira, & Nahas, 2016: 2).
One of the most important issues related to the quality of life is finding the criteria and combining indicators to evaluate the level and measure changes in the quality of urban life. Among these, one of the criteria that can be used to measure the quality of life is the level of satisfaction of citizens with various indicators and variables, which can be said that the subjective dimension of the quality of life is considered in these studies. In the objective dimension, based on statistical data and related figures, the quality of urban life is calculated (Fani et al., 2014: 66).
With all the efforts made in recent years, the quality of life in Tehran shows its relatively good quality in the city's districts. In a general comparison, it should be said that the quality of life in the areas located in the north, north-central, and northeast of the city is in better condition. The quality of life is also good in the northwest and southeast. In the southwestern part of the city, the quality of life seems to be somewhat decent. Among the districts of Tehran, District 1 has the highest quality of life among the 22 districts of Tehran (quoted from Tehran City Atlas website). But considering that the region is one of the 24 neighborhoods, this article seeks to show the quality of life among the neighborhoods in this region.
This article intends to take a step towards answering the following questions with a problem-oriented approach:
• What are the influencing factors on the quality of urban life of the residents of different neighborhoods in one area of Tehran?
• At what level is the quality of urban life among the residents of different neighborhoods in one area of Tehran?
• What is the difference in the quality of urban life within and between neighborhoods? And finally, what effect do micro and macro-level variables have on the quality of urban life in the objective and subjective dimensions?
According to the investigations, in the current research, the following variables and indicators have been used to measure the quality of urban life of the residents of different neighborhoods in one area of Tehran city, and the relevant indicators and items have been questioned in each of them have been taken (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Research concept consisting of evaluating the quality of urban life
Research method:
The current research is in the field of applied research in terms of its purpose, its nature, and research method, it is a descriptive-analytical research of the secondary analysis type. In order to achieve the objectives of the research, the data of "Tehran Quality of Life Monitoring Survey" were used. The statistical population of the project consists of households living in the 1st district of Tehran (in 24 neighborhoods).
Various techniques are used to analyze multi-level data and since in multi-level analysis, choosing the right strategy depends on the questions and hypotheses of the research, after entering the information from the questionnaires into the SPSS software, to perform statistical tests and analyze the data from HLM software was used.
The questionnaire used in this study was compiled through consultation with specialists, experts, and city managers. In this questionnaire, household characteristics include gender, age, education, occupation, income, and place of birth of the head of the household. Also, information related to four dimensions (satisfaction with services and facilities of the neighborhood; satisfaction with movement and roads in the neighborhood; satisfaction with the health and environment of the neighborhood, and satisfaction with the relationships and social context of the neighborhood); The main index measures the quality of life as follows.
Table 1: Dimensions of the dependent variable
(quality of urban life) measured in the study
Index |
sub-indices |
number of questions |
alpha coefficient |
Quality of urban life |
Satisfaction with neighborhood services and facilities |
12 |
0.89 |
Satisfaction with movement and passages in the neighborhood |
8 |
||
Satisfaction with neighborhood health and environment |
5 |
||
Satisfaction with relationships and social fabric of the neighborhood |
4 |
Findings:
The findings indicate that although the quality of life in Region 1 is in a better condition than other regions, there are differences among the localities of Region 1.
The findings of cross-class correlation in this study showed that 23% of the changes in the average score of the quality of life of the residents of the neighborhoods of District One of Tehran were affected by the macro variables (social, demographic, and economic level) and 77% of the changes were affected by the micro variables (individual level). Also, the regression model of random coefficients showed that there is a significant relationship between the individual level variables of age and education with the average urban quality of life score.
In the examination of the relationship between the average quality of urban life score and demographic and economic variables (housing) and social variables, it was found that there is a significant relationship between variables such as population size, year of building construction (oldness of housing), number of rooms, area of housing and ownership of housing with the average score. There is no quality of urban life. But in examining social variables, social capital (including the two dimensions of participation and social trust); and the feeling of security on the average quality of urban life, it was determined that only the variable of feeling of security can have an effect on the function variable. In the end, it can be said that the weak services and facilities and the unfavorable planning conditions governing the city of Tehran have been added to the reason that despite the fact that in the quality of urban life index, region one has a better situation than most of the 22 regions of Tehran, but the difference and inequality in The level of its localities can be observed.
Table 2: Scores obtained for the quality of urban
life index of the studied localities of the region
The level of quality of urban life |
Neighborhood ranking and Urban Life Quality score |
Level one (3 neighborhoods) The highest urban quality of life |
1. Naft (77.9), 2. Jamaran (75.4), 3. Niavaran (70.6), |
Level two (14 neighborhoods) Average city life quality |
4. Cheezer (67.5). 5. Azgol (66.8), 6. Hesarbuali (65.9), 7. Tajrish (65.5), 8. Danshgah (64.2), 9. Darabad (64.2), 10. Farmaniyeh (63.0), 11. Kashank (62.4), 12. Qaitariya (61.9), 13. Dezashib (61.8), 14. Hekmat (61.5), 15. Imamzadeh Qasem (61.5), 16. Araj (60.8), 17. Baghe Ferdous (60.1), |
Level three (7 neighborhoods) Low quality of urban life |
18. Sohank (58.8), 19. (Darkeh (58.3), 20. Zafaranieh (58.2), 21. Darband (56.8), 22. Evin (54.4), 23. Gulabdere (54.0), 24. Mahmoudieh (46.9). |
Resources:
Feni, Zohra and et al. (2014). Measuring the quality of urban life with an emphasis on gender, case study: Qorve city. Scientific Quarterly of Urban Ecology Research, 6(12), 65-78.
Nahas, M.I.P.; Pereira, M.A.M.; de Avelar Esteves, O.; Gonçalves, É. Metodologia de construção do índice de qualidade de vida urbana dos municípios brasileiros (IQVU-BR). Anais , 1–20.
Serag El Din, H.; Shalaby, A.; Farouh, H.E.; Elariane, S.A. Principles of urban quality of life for a neighborhood. HBRC J. 2013, 9, 86–92.
Wesz, J.G.B.; Miron, L.I.G.; Delsante, I.; Tzortzopoulos, P. (2023). Urban Quality of Life: A Systematic Literature Review. Urban Sci., Vol, 7, No, 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci7020056.
Hramezani@outlook.com
** Corresponding Author: M.A of Academic Board of the Department of Cultural Sociology, Institute of Humanities and Social Studies, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
*** Assistant Professor of Demography, Department of Population Economics and Human Capital, National Population Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.
آخوندی، عباس احمد و همکاران (1393) سنجش کیفیت زندگی شهری در کلانشهر تهران، نشریه هنرهای زیبا - معماری و شهرسازی، دوره ۱۹، شماره ۲، تابستان 1393، صص 5-22.
احمدی، اکبر و اسفندیار جهانگرد (1400) رتبه بندی محلات شهر تهران از نظر سطح برخورداری و کیفیت زندگی با استفاده از Fuzzy TOPSIS، اقتصاد شهری، دوره 5، شماره 1، توالی7، صص 127-148.
اجزا شکوهی، محمد و همکاران (1392) ارزیابی مشارکت زنان در ایمنی فضاهای عمومی شهر سقز با مدل مشارکت شهری، فصلنامه مطالعات ساختار و کارکرد شهری، دوره 1، شماره 2، صص 47-69.
اسمیت ، دیوید (1381) کیفیت زندگی رفاه انسانی و عدالت اجتماعی، ترجمه حسین حاتمینژاد و حکمت شاهی اردبیلی، فصلنامه اطلاعات سیاسی- اقتصادی، شماره 185 و 186، صص 160-173.
باسخا، مهدی و همکاران (1389) رتبه بندی شاخص کیفیت زندگی در استان های کشور، فصلنامه رفاه اجتماعی، دوره دهم ، شماره 37، صص 95-112.
براتی، ناصر و محمدرضا یزدان پناه شاه آبادی (1390) بررسی ارتباط مفهومی سرمایه اجتماعی و کیفیت زندگی در محیط شهری (نمونه موردی: شهر جدید پردیس)، جامعه پژوهی فرهنگی، 2(1)، صص 25-49.
بيات، معصومه و محبوبه بيات (1390) بررسي كيفيت زندگي زنان در شهر مشهد، فصلنامه انديشه هاي راهبردي زن و خانواده، شماره 9، صص 575- 587.
حاتمی نژاد، حسین و همکاران (1392) تحلیل مکانی شاخصهای کیفیت زندگی در شهر تهران، فصلنامه پژوهشهای جغرافیای انسانی، دوره 45، شماره 4، صص 29-56.
خوارزمی، شهیندخت (1388) کیفیت زندگی وشاخص خوشبختی، تهران، ناشر شرکت روابط عمومی و تبلیغات هفت تبلیغ.
دانشمند، سارا و کاوه فتاحی (1402) چارچوب فرآیند ادراکی متعالیه به منظور ادراک کیفیت زیباییشناسی فضا (برهمگذاری دیدگاه علوم جدید و حکمت متعالیه).
فصلنامه مطالعات شهر ایرانی- اسلامی، شماره 50، دوره 13، زمستان 1401، صص 19-36.
رستگار نسب، فرهاد و نرگس مصطفوی و امیر جهان نمائی (1391) بررسى و مقايسه كيفيت زندگى زنان شاغل و غيرشاغل شهرستان مشهد.
فصلنامه جمعیت، بهار.
رضوانی، محمدرضا و حسین منصوریان (1387) سنجش کیفیت زندگی: بررسی مفاهیم، شاخصها، مدلها و ارائه مدل پیشنهادی برای نواحی روستایی، فصلنامه روستا و توسعه، شماره 3، صص 1-26.
رهنمايي، محمدتقي و همکاران ( 1390) تحليل کيفيت زندگي در بافت فرسوده شهر مياندوآب، فصلنامه مديريت شهري، دوره 9، شماره 28، صص 223-240.
زیاری، کرامت اله و همکاران (1389) مبانی و تکنیکهای برنامه ریزی شهری، ناشر: دانشگاه بینالمللی چابهار.
شماعی، علی و احمد پوراحمد (1392) بهسازی و نوسازی شهری از دیدگاه علم جغرافیا، چاپ پنجم، تهران، دانشگاه تهران.
شماعی، علی و همکاران (1391) تحلیل نابرابریهای شاخصهای کیفیت زندگی در سطح محلات شهر بابلسر، فصلنامه انجمن جغرافیایی ایران، دوره جدید، سال دهم، شماره 33، صص 253-280.
عظیمی، لیلا (1392) تأثیر اعتماد اجتماعی بر کیفیت زندگی دانشجویان دانشگاه آزاد بروجرد، مطالعات علوم اجتماعی ایران، 10(38)، صص 186-215.
عظيمي، آزاده (1389) «ابعاد و شاخصهاي كيفيت زندگي شهري»، شوراها، ش55.
عنبری، موسی (1389) بررسی تحولات کیفیت زندگی در ایران (1365 تا 1385)، فصلنامه توسعه روستایی، شماره 2، صص 149-181.
غفاری، غلامرضا (1390) بررسی رابطه بین صنعت و کیفیت زندگی (مقایسه موردی مناطق روستایی شهرستان قروه)، فصلنامه توسعه محلی (روستائی-شهری)، دوره 3، شماره 1، صص 1-24.
فنی، زهره (1390) زنان در بازار کار شهري؛ مطالعه تطبيقي شهرهاي تهران و مونترال، فصلنامه مطالعات و پژوهش هاي شهري منطقهاي، دوره 3 , شماره 11، صص 57-74.
فنی، زهره و سامان حیدری و سامان حیدری و پرویز آقایی (1394) سنجش کیفیت زندگی شهری با تأکید بر جنسیت، مطالعه موردی: شهر قروه، فصلنامه علمی پژوهش های بوم شناسی شهری 6(12)، صص 65-78.
قاليباف، محمدباقر و همکاران (1390) ارزيابي کيفيت زندگي شهري (مطالعه موردي: محله يافت آباد)، فصلنامه جغرافيا، دوره 9، شماره 31، صص 33-53.
قائم، گیسو (1372) شهر سالم در کشورهای در حال توسعه، مجله علمی-پژوهشی صفه، دوره 5، شماره 2-1، صص 2-9.
لطفي، صديقه (1388) مفهوم کيفيت زندگي شهري: تعاريف، ابعاد و سنجش آن در برنامه ريزي شهري، فصلنامه نگرش هاي نو در جغرافياي انساني، دوره 1 ، شماره، 4 ، صص 65-80.
لينچ، كوين (1376) تئوري شكل خوب شهر، ترجمة حسين بحريني، تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
ماجدي، سيد مسعود و عبدالعلي لهسايي زاده (1385) بررسي رابطه بين متغيرهاي زمينه اي، سرمايه اجتماعي و رضايت از كيفيت زندگي: مطالعه موردي در روستاهاي استان فارس، فصلنامه روستا و توسعه، دوره 9، شماره 4، صص 91-135.
مهدیزاده، جواد (1392) برنامهریزی راهبردی توسعه شهری (تجربیات اخیر جهانی و جایگاه آن در ایران)، تهران: ناشر، آرمان شهر.
Al-Qawasmi, J., Saeed, M., Asfour, O. S., & Aldosary, A. S. (2021) Assessing Urban Quality of Life: Developing the Criteria for Saudi Cities. Frontiers in Built Environment, 7, Article.
682391. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2021.682391.
Das, D. (2008) Urban quality of life: A case study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research, Vol. 88, pp: 297–310.
El Din, H. S., Shalaby, A., Farouh, H. E., & Elariane, S. A. (2013) Principles of urban quality of life for a neighborhood. Hbrc Journal, 9(1), 86-92.
Felce, D. and Perry, J. (1995) Quality of Life: Its Definition and Measurement. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 16, 51-74.
Foo, T. (2000) Subjective assessment of urban quality of life in Singapore (1997-1998) Habitat International, 24(1): 31-49.
Lee, Y. J. (2008) Subjective quality of life measurement in Taipei. Building and Environment, 43(7), 1205-1215.
Nahas, M.I.P.; Pereira, M.A.M.; de Avelar Esteves, O.; Gonçalves, É. Metodologia de construção do índice de qualidade de vida urbana dos municípios brasileiros (IQVU-BR). Anais, 1–20.
Parfect, M. & Power, G. (1997) Planning for Urban Quality, London: Routledge.
Roback, J. (1982) Wages, rents and the quality of life, Journal of Political Economy, Vol, 90 (6): pp: 1257-1278.
Schmit R. B. (2002) Considering Social Cohesion in Quality of Life Assessments: Concepts and Measurement, Social Indicators Research.
Schyns, P., & Boelhouwer, J. (2004) The State of the City Amsterdam Monitor: Measuring Quality of Life in Amsterdam. In Community Quality-of-Life Indicators (pp. 133-152). Springer Netherlands.
Wesz, J.G.B.; Miron, L.I.G.; Delsante, I.; Tzortzopoulos, P. (2023) Urban Quality of Life: A Systematic Literature Review. Urban Sci., Vol, 7, No, 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci7020056.