Mojtaba Rafieian; Delaram Shojaee
Abstract
Social sustainability to respond to the cities’ social problems and issues and as an efficient dimension in achieving sustainable urban development is a discourse that urban researchers have highly regarded in the last two decades, and researchers have looked at it with different dimensions ...
Read More
Social sustainability to respond to the cities’ social problems and issues and as an efficient dimension in achieving sustainable urban development is a discourse that urban researchers have highly regarded in the last two decades, and researchers have looked at it with different dimensions of the urban built environment. The critical issue is the lack of comprehensive and systematic research in urban built environments, policies and plans. Therefore, the purpose of this study is a meta-synthesis review of selected sources to clarify the dimensions of social sustainability in these areas. Four categories of urban form, policies and plans, dimensions and features and the main areas of social sustainability have been identified by data coding using the MAXQDA software to achieve this goal. By understanding and explaining the stated categories, the results of the studies are presented in a framework of social sustainability, including conceptualization, policy-making and action in the urban built environment. Each dimension enters democracy-based, participation-based, and ideology-based discourses in a more remarkable synthesis. A deep understanding of the results provides a basis for future studies to conduct further studies in each proposed discourse and link them more effectively to social sustainability.
Keywords: Social Sustainability, Built Environment, Democracy, Ideology, Participation.
Introduction
Social sustainability to respond to the cities’ social problems and issues and as an efficient dimension in achieving sustainable urban development is a discourse that urban researchers have highly regarded in the last two decades. In general, despite the recent attention to social dimensions, social sustainability is still under theorization and has been less discussed in urban built environments. The critical issue is the lack of comprehensive and systematic research in urban built environments, policies and plans. Due to the multifaceted nature of social sustainability in these areas, studying these studies from different levels and degrees is necessary. What will be discussed in this study is: according to the review of various sources, what are the dimensions of social sustainability in the urban built environment, despite the importance of the policy and urban planning? Although there have been several studies on social sustainability in urban processes, built environment, urban development, etc., which have described and explained this concept, it seems that there is a lack of research that examines all the dimensions, characteristics and components of this concept and provides a comprehensive understanding of social sustainability in this field.
Methodology
Therefore, the purpose of this study is a meta-synthesis review of selected sources to clarify the dimensions of social sustainability in these areas. The upcoming research has been conducted using seven steps of meta-synthesis review and data coding using the MAXQDA software to achieve this goal. During the information extraction process, 258 primary codes were identified by the software using the open coding approach. In the next step, they were divided into 11 core codes based on common concepts according to the communication process of microdata. Then, by combining the core codes, four categories of urban form, policies and plans, dimensions and features, and the main areas of social sustainability were achieved.
Results & DISCUSSION
The category of urban form is formed by integrating the core codes of density, land use, urban space, housing, accessibility, built environment, housing and spatial structure. The category of policies and plans results from integrating the core codes of regeneration, renovation, urban management, neighborhood development, urban development plans, new urbanism, and TOD. The category of characteristics and contextual factors results from the action of the core codes of dependence on the context, dynamism, dependence on culture, etc. Finally, the category of social sustainability dimensions is formed by integrating the core codes of participation, equality, safety, sense of place, social inclusion, social cohesion, social capital, etc. By understanding and explaining the stated categories, the results of the studies are presented in a framework of social sustainability, including conceptualization, policy-making and action in the urban built environment. Each dimension enters democracy-based, participation-based and ideology-based discourses in a more remarkable synthesis. Democracy, which means equality, requires social policies to move toward sustainability. Moving toward inclusion and social cohesion in urban policies requires a democratic urban context to increase the social capital resulting from this connection and create well-being for the citizens. Social sustainability is discourse-based, and in a way, it is necessary to apply this concept and connect it as much as possible with the discourse of participation. The fact is that none of these concepts alone can explain social sustainability in studies and the urban environment. The connections and categories that make up these concepts are oriented on two levels. The first level includes people, government, and planners; the second level provides knowledge, power and cooperation. This framework creates a different level of interaction with the built environment depending on the political context and the ruling power. Planners can validate the powerlessness and silence of the excluded by representing their values, ideas, and worldviews and somehow turn them into the dominant ideology for achieving sustainability.
Conclusions
A deep understanding of the results provides a basis for future studies to conduct further studies in each proposed discourse and link them more effectively to social sustainability. The significant achievement of this research is combining the results of social sustainability studies in urban studies and providing a different perspective from the aspects presented in the form of a theoretical framework. In addition to defining the direction of urban studies in the field of social sustainability, this theoretical framework can emphasize that the proposed discourses are interwoven and interdependent. And whether social sustainability is used as a goal or a tool, all factors and layers must be considered together.
Ali Akbar Taghipour; Abolfazl Mashayekhi; Ghasem Jafari
Abstract
Urbanization is one of the major challenges facing societies. Governments are largely unable to carry out those tasks, and continuation of the current trend can increase the problems of citizens with urban management. Today the good urban governance is spoken as an appropriate solution to stop the current ...
Read More
Urbanization is one of the major challenges facing societies. Governments are largely unable to carry out those tasks, and continuation of the current trend can increase the problems of citizens with urban management. Today the good urban governance is spoken as an appropriate solution to stop the current process. Social capital is one of the effective factors in achieving good urban governance. In this regard, considering the challenges in Semnan, measuring citizens' satisfaction with the performance of urban management and also their role in creating good urban governance is important. In order to study the role of social capital in good urban governance in Semnan, first the definitions of good urban governance and social capital were examined and then the effective indicators of social capital in good urban governance were extracted. Then, citizens' opinions were collected through questionnaire. The results of this research show that the components of social capital and good urban governance in Semnan are not in a good condition and lack of accountability, transparency, collective agreement and legality in Semnan urban governance has caused a loss of trust in urban management and reduced willingness to participate in urban projects. The result is a lack of involvement of citizens in decision-making. Also, the lack of infrastructure such as local council and an appropriate mechanism for public participation in the approval process for projects have been effective.
