Evaluating Enjoyment of Urban Regions Through Innovative City Indicators with An Emphasis on Social and Cultural Indicators (A Case Study: Tabriz Metropolis)

Open access

Abstract

This research aims to define the degree of enjoyment in regions of Tabriz metropolis through innovative city indicators with an emphasis on the social and cultural indicators. In terms of practical purposes, the present study is of applied research type, and in terms of the nature of methodology, it is a comparative research. In this research, Shannon entropy method for weighing criteria is used to determine the weight of each of the indices under study, and a TOPSIS technique is applied in order to rank the regions of Tabriz metropolis to create the innovative city. Emphasizing on the social and cultural indicators, the findings of the research show that region 8 tops the ranking list and region 10 is ranked the last in terms of enjoyment through innovative city indicators. The result of this research indicates that the social and cultural indicators are not distributed equitably to fit well into an innovative city concept, and there is a focus on spatial distribution of indicators. Moreover, the results of this research indicate the incompatibility of the distribution of social and cultural indicators with the distribution of population across the city. Therefore, since innovation is the key to the development and expansion of cities as well as the equitable and rational distribution of services and facilities necessary for development and progress, the fair distribution of social and cultural indicators is essential for the realization of an innovative city.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Bettencourt L. M. Lobo J. Helbing D. Kühnert C. & West G. B. 2007. Growth innovation scaling and the pace of life in cities. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 104(17) 7301-7306.

  • Buschmann A. Meyer B. & Schewe G. 2016. Factor State in Innovative Ecosystems: A Comparison between Brazil and Germany. International Journal of Innovation 4(2) 198-207.

  • Capdevila I. 2018. Knowing communities and the innovative capacity of cities. City Culture and Society 13 8-12.

  • Cermasi O. 2017. Contemporary landscape urbanism principles as innovative methodologies: the design of an armature of public spaces for the revitalisation of a shrinking city. The Journal of Public Space 2(2) 111-126.

  • Charrieras D. Darchen S. & Sigler T. 2018. The shifting spaces of creativity in Hong Kong. Cities 74 134-141.

  • Exenberger A. Strobl P. Bischof G. & Mokhiber J. 2013. Globalization and the City Innsbruck university press p: 221.

  • Gallouj F. Rubalcaba L. Toivonen M. & Windrum P. 2018. Understanding social innovation in services industries Industry and Innovation 25 (6) 551-569.

  • Gharehbaglou M. & Kargar T. 2017. New Insight into the Creative Urban Clusters (The potentials of joint space between Naqhsh-e Jahan Square and the Art University of Isfahan as an attractive place for the creative class). BAGH-E NAZAR13(45) 47-66.

  • Ghorbani R. et al. 2015. An Overview on New Patterns of Urban Planning. Foruzesh: Tabriz pp. 1-224 p. 139.

  • Ghorbani R. Hossein Abadi S. & Toorani A. 2013. Creative cities: as cultural approach in urban development. Journal of Arid Regions Geographics Studies3(11) 1-18.

  • Gregory J. J. & Rogerson C. M. 2018. Suburban creativity: The geography of creative industriesin Johannesburg. Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series 39(39) 31-52.

  • Hajinejad A. Fattahi A. & Paydar A. 2016. Application of Models and Decision-Making Techniques in Geography by Emphasizing the Rural Urban and Tourism Programming Jahad Daneshgahi Tehran pp. 1-344 p. 67.

  • Johnson B. 2014. Cities systems of innovation and economic development Innovation Organization & Management 10 (2-3) pp.146-155.

  • Kauppinen H. 2016. Enabling Collaborative Innovation in a Smart City Creating Scenarios of Open Innovation Platforms Heini Laurea University of Applied Sciences Leppävaara. pp.7.

  • Kiuru J. & Inkinen T. 2017. Predicting innovative growth and demand with proximate human capital: A case study of the Helsinki metropolitan area. Cities 64 9-17.

  • Musterd S. 2002. The Creative Cultural Knowledge City Some Conditions. Paper presented at the University of Kaiserlautern 28 10-2002.

  • Nazmfar H. Aftab A. Nazampour N. & Majnoony Tootakhane A. 2016. Evaluation and Prioritization of Urban Areas Based on Parameters Creative City (Case Study: Sanandaj City) pp. 260 274.

  • Nazmfar H. Alavi S. & Eseghi A. 2017. Measuring the Ranking of Urban Settlements of Ardabil Province in terms of Possessing the Creative City Geography and Environmental Planning 28 (2) 167-184.

  • Naghsh Mohit Consulting Engineers 2014. Development Design and Construction of Tabriz (Comprehensive Plan) City Identification vol. 4 East Azerbaijan General Roads and Urban Development Organization p. 33.

  • Pourtaheri M. 2015. Application of Multivariate Decision-Making Methods in Geography Tehran pp. 1-224.

  • Rabbani Khorasgani A. Rabbani R. Adibi Sedeh M. & Moazeni A. 2011. Review the Role of Social Diversity in Creating Innovative and Creative Cities (Case Study: Isfahan City). Geography and Development Iranian Journal 21 159-180.

  • Shengzu G. Mei Y. & Qinqin Z. 2016. Strategic Thinking on Developing Innovative City to Implement the Strategy of Innovation-Driven Development-Based on the Model of Shenzhen Innovative Development Forum on Science and Technology in China www.cnki.com.cn.

  • Tidd J. Bessant J. & Pavitt K. 2012. Managing Innovation A. Jabbarzadeh & A. Kahalzadeh Nashr Daneshgahi Center Tehran pp. 1-694.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 58 58 16
PDF Downloads 46 46 11