تحلیلی بر برخورداری کلان‌شهرهای ایران از شاخص‌های شهر خلاق

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی - کاربردی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکدۀ علوم انسانی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران

2 استادیار گروه جغرافیای انسانی، دانشکدۀ جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

3 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

چکیده

این تحقیق ازنظر ماهیت توصیفی‌تحلیلی و کاربردی است و جمع‌آوری داده‌ها به‌صورت کتابخانه‌ای‌اسنادی بوده است. در این تحقیق، بعد از انجام روش آماری تحلیل عاملی مشخص شد بین سازۀ نظری و تجربی تحقیق همخوانی نسبی مناسبی وجود دارد. به‌علاوه، نتایج تحقیق نشان داد کلان‌شهر تهران با ضریب Q (099/0) در رتبۀ اول و کلان‌شهرهای کرج (359/0)، قم (366/0)، اصفهان (393/0)، مشهد (804/0)، شیراز (602/0)، تبریز (952/0) و اهواز (957/0) به‌ترتیب در رتبه‌های بعدی ازلحاظ برخورداری از شاخص‌های شهر خلاق قرار دارند. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان داد از بین ابعاد چهارگانۀ شاخص شهر خلاق ایرانی، عامل طبقۀ خلاق و امکانات محلی با تبیین‌کردن 087/25 درصد تغییرات واریانس و با وزن نسبی 293/0، مهم‌ترین عامل و شاخص‌های مهاجران خارجی واردشده با ضریب اهمیت نسبی 0501/0 و متولدان خارج از ساکنان شهر با ضریب اهمیت نسبی 0494/0 و بعد از آن‌ها، شاخص‌های تحقیق و توسعه، به‌عنوان مهم‌ترین شاخص‌ها، اهمیت فراوانی در تحقق مفهوم شهر خلاق در کلان‌شهرها دارند. به‌طور کلی، یافته‌ها بیانگر همخوانی نسبی بین نظریۀ فلوریدا و یافته‌های پژوهش است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of Iran Metropolises in Terms of Possessing Indices of Creative City

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohsen Kalantari 1
  • Seyed Abbas Rajaei 2
  • Bagher Fotouhi Mehrabani 3
1 Associate Professor, Deparemnet of Geography and Urban Planning, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Human Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3 M.Sc. in Geography and Urban Planning, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Creativity has gained much attention in urban and regional studies. From urban creativity view, the main questions are “why some places (cities and regions) are more attractive for new and creative people and activities than other locations?” This is inspired by the theories such as the role of human capital in economic growth, the role of creative human capital in city and region economic development, the role of diversity and low entry barriers in economic productivity, the role of tolerance in attraction of new people and different lifestyles, and the role of territorial assets in attraction of creative classes and industries, theorists of this field emphasize on the unique role of urban creativity in cities and regions growth, especially economic growth.
Because of benefiting from the features such as concentration, diversity, and dynamism, metropolises have a lot of potentials to foster creative human capital. Iranian metropolises due to the diversity of economic activity, the concentration of the majority of educational centers, and also the concentration of technology and information production possess the most important cultural centers. Thus, they can attract creative capital and provide needed grounds for the realization of a creative city. With the importance of the creative city in the economic, social and cultural development and renewal of urban space, the main objective of this study is to show the status of Iran’s metropolises in term of possessing the indices  of creative city in comparison with each other.    
Methodology
This study is a descriptive and analytical research. Also, this is an applied research regarding purpose. In this study, library-documentary is used to collect data and to analyze data we used the Excel, SPSS, XLSTAT, SUPER DECISION, as well as models such as F'ANP (a combination of factor analysis and analytic network process) and VIKOR. Also, we used Shannon-Wiener diversity index to find the religious and ethnic diversity in the metropolises. 
Discussion and Results
At this stage, after reviewing the relevant theoretical and empirical literature and development of the theoretical framework of the research, and extraction of creative city indices, the data were collected and was put in the hybrid model of F'ANP and Vikor to calculate creativity coefficient for each metropolis. In the first stage, 34 identified indices of the creative city were placed in the factor analysis model to find different aspects of the indices. In the factor analysis, only the first 4 factors had eigenvalues larger than one. These four factors can explain 85.619% of the variance of variables. In this analysis, the most important factor is factor number 1 that alone makes up 25.087% of the variance. Factors number two to four explain 23.692, 18.702 and 18.138% of the variance, respectively. In the last stage of factor analysis, the factors were distinguished. The first factor is creative class and territorial assets; the second factor is talent and diversity, the third factor R&D and openness, and the fourth factor technology. In the next step, ANP model was established. In ANP model, its stages were conducted and the weighted super-matrix was formed and the relative weight of indices was calculated. The results showed that among different creative city indices, creative class and territorial assets explain 25.087% of the variance and with a relative weight of 0.293 it was the most important factor. The talent and diversity explain 23.692% of the variance and with a relative weight of 0.277; R&D and openness explain 18.75% of the variance and with a relative weight of 0.219 and technology with explaining 18.13% of the variance and with a relative weight of 0.212 possessed the next ranks, in order. Also, among creative city indices, foreign immigrants, foreign-born residents, R&D centers, the share of R & D budget from total GDP and researchers working in the area of R&D are the most important indices, respectively. Furthermore, the results of F'ANP model were loaded in VIKOR model and the results showed that Iran's metropolises are different in terms of possessing creative city indices. Tehran with a creativity coefficient of (0.099) was in the first rank compared with other metropolises and Karaj (0.359), Qom (0.366), Isfahan (0.393), Mashhad (0.804), Shiraz (0.602), Tabriz (0.952) and Ahvaz (0.0957) possessed the next ranks.
Conclusions
In this study, with the purpose of the analyzing Iran’s metropolises in term of creative city indices, we extracted the indexes from literature and earlier researches and the data were collected. Analyzing the data showed that Iran’s metropolises in term of possessing creative city indices are heterogeneous in a way that Tehran with gaining the highest coefficient of creativity was in the first rank. This finding is consistent with Sevad Jani findings (2015). He believes Tehran metropolises with having attractive amenities and diverse environment leads to the attraction of creative people and class from across the country. In this study, we came to the conclusion that in metropolises of Iran among different creative city indices, creative class, tolerance and R&D are essential in the realization of the creative city concept. Also, the research findings indicate that realization of the idea of the creative city in Iran’s metropolises is relatively consistent with the Florida (2002) model of the creative city. Furthermore, the findings also showed that creative city is a relative concept and related to the scale of studies. While Tehran gained the first rank at a national level, comparison of these findings with similar studies such as research conducted by Zanganeh et al. (2016) shows that metropolis of Tehran is in the last rank in the context of creative city indices in comparison with other cities in the world. In other words, while on an international scale Tehran is facing with many serious problems in maintaining its creative class, it cannot be very successful in the attraction of international creative class. With these issues, we can conclude that Iran’s metropolises should first attempt to improve the creative urban environment to develop creative people and activity. In the next place, they should try to provide needed grounds for maintaining and attracting domestic creative classes and activity and absorption of foreign creative class.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • creative city
  • creative city indices
  • fostering
  • Iran’s Metropolises
  • maintaining and attracting of creativity

حاجی حسینی، حجت‌الله؛ اشتری، حسن؛ مهدنژاد، حافظ (1393)، «نقش نظریۀ شهر خلاق در پویش اقتصاد فرهنگی و زندگی شهری»، مجلۀ ترویج علم، دورۀ 5، شمارۀ 4: صص ۱۵–۸.

حبیب‌پور گتابی، کرم؛ صفری شالی، رضا (1393)، راهنمای جامع کاربرد SPSS در تحقیقات پیمایشی (تحلیل داده‌های کمی)، تهران: لویه.

ربانی خوارسنگانی، علی و همکاران (2011)، «بررسی نقش تنوع اجتماعی در ایجاد شهرهای خلاق و نوآور موردمطالعه : شهر اصفهان»، فصلنامه جغرافیا و توسعه، دورۀ 9، شمارۀ 21: صص ۱۸۰ –۱۵۹. Retrieved (http://gdij.usb.ac.ir/article_586_86.html).

رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ شعبانی، مرتضی (1394)، «تحلیل شاخص‌های خلاقیت شهری در نظام سکونتگاهی استان مازندران»، فصلنامۀ جغرافیا و آمایش شهری- منطقه‌ای، شمارۀ 5، دورۀ 16، صص 19–34.

زبردست، اسفندیار (2011)، «کاربرد فرایند تحلیل شبکه‏ای (ANP) در برنامه‏ریزی شهری و منطقه‏ای»، نشریۀ هنرهای زیبا- معماری و شهرسازی، دورۀ 2، شمارۀ 41: صص ۹۰–۷۹. Retrieved (http://jfaup.ut.ac.ir/article_22270.html)

زبردست، اسفندیار (2014)، «کاربرد مدل F’ANP در شهرسازی»، نشریه هنرهای زیبا-معماری و شهرسازی، دورۀ 19، شمارۀ 2، صص ۳۸–۲۳.

زنگنه شهرکی، سعید و همکاران (1395)، «تحلیل قابلیت‌ها و جایگاه شهر تهران ازنظر تحقق مفهوم شهر خلاق در مقایسه با سایر شهرهای دنیا»، دو فصلنامۀ جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری، دورۀ 3، شمارۀ 2، صص ۸۹–۶۷.

شکویی، حسین (1387)، دیدگاه‌های نو در جغرافیای شهری، چاپ دوازدهم، تهران: سمت.

عسگری سواد جانی، علیرضا (1393)، «ارزیابی تطبیقی شاخص‌های شهر خلاق در کلان‌شهرهای ایران (نمونۀ موردی: تهران واصفهان)»، پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.

فتوحی مهربانی، باقر (1395)، «تحلیلی بر مفهوم فلوریدایی شهر خلاق»، سمینار آینده‌پژوهی توسعۀ ملی ایران در بستر جغرافیا، تهران: دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات.

فلوریدا، ریچارد (1390)، شهرها و طبقه خلاق، ترجمۀ محمد اسماعیل انصاری و ابراهیم انصاری، تهران: جامعه‌شناسان.

قربانی، رسول و همکاران (1393)، نگرشی بر الگوهای نوین آمایش شهری، چاپ اول، تبریز: فروزش.

مرکز آمار ایران (1390)، بررسی ویژگی‌های جمعیتی، اجتماعی و اقتصادی کلان‌شهرها و مقایسۀ تغییرات آن در سال‌های 1385 و 1390.

مرکز آمار ایران. (1390)، سرشماری‌های نفوس و مسکن 1385 و 1390.

Acs, Z. J., & Megyesi, M. I. (2009). Creativity and industrial cities: A case study of Baltimore. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 21(4), 421–439.

Afolabi, M. O., Dionne, S., & Lewis, H. (2006). Are we there yet? A review of creativity methodologies, interdisciplinary innovation and imagination in engineering education. In Ithaca, NY: Cornel University.

Bellini, E., Ottaviano, G. I. P., Pinelli, D., & Prarolo, G. (2013). Cultural diversity and economic performance: evidence from European regions. In Geography, institutions and regional economic performance (pp. 121–141). Springer.

Bowen, H. P., Moesen, W., & Sleuwaegen, L. (2008). A Composite Index of the Creative Economy. Review of Business and Economics, 4, 375–397.

Cheung, J. W. (2009). Perpetuating Spadina Avenue : Conceptualizing the Creative Milieu (Master's thesis). University of Waterloo.

Clark, T. N., Lloyd, R., Wong, K. K., & Jain, P. (2002). Amenities drive urban growth. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24(5), 493–515.

Coletta, C. (2008). Fostering the creative city. CEOs for Cities Http://www. Ceosforcities. Org/files/Fostering the Creative City Wallace. Pdf.

Correia, C. M., & da Silva Costa, J. (2014). Measuring Creativity in the EU Member States. Investigaciones Regionales, 30, 7–26.

Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work, leisure and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.

Florida, R. (2005). Cities and the creative class. Routledge.

Florida, R. (2012). The Rise of the Creative Class-Revisited: Revised and Expanded. Basic books.

Florida, R. (2011). Creativity and prosperity: The global creativity index. Martin Prosperity Institute.

Florida, R., & Tinagli, I. (2004). Europe in the creative age. Creative Class Group, (February), 48. Retrieved from http://www.creativeclass.com/rfcgdb/articles/Europe_in_the_Creative_Age_2004.pdf

Girard, L. F., Baycan, T., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Sustainable city and creativity: promoting creative urban initiatives. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

Glaeser, E. L., & Saiz, A. (2003). The rise of the skilled city. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Hall, P. (2000). Creative Cities and Economic Development. Urban Studies, 37(4), 639–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980050003946

Hall, P. G., & Raumplaner, S. (1998). Cities in civilization. Pantheon Books New York.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage.

Jacobs, J. (1969). The economy of cities. The economy of cities. London: Jonathan Cape.

Kern, P., & Runge, J. (2009). 12. KEA briefing: towards a European creativity index. Measuring Creativity, 191.

Kloudova, J., & Stehlikova, B. (2010). Creativity Index for the Czech Republic in Terms of Regional Similarities and Geographical Location. Economics and management, 15(1), 100-109.

Landry, C. (2012). The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. Earthscan.

Landry, C., & Bianchini, F. (1995). The creative city (Vol. 12). Demos.

Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42.

Manacorda, M., Manning, A., & Wadsworth, J. (2012). The impact of immigration on the Stracture of wages: theory and evidence from Britain. Journal of the European Economic Association, 10(1), 120–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4774.2011.01049.

Opricovic, S. (1998). Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 2(1), 5–21.

Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305–310.

Songmei, L. (2005). High tech spatial concentration human capital, agglomeration economies, location theories and creative citie (Master's thesis). University of Louisville.

Stolarick, K., Mellander, C., & Florida, R. (2012). Human Capital in Cities and Suburbs. Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS-Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.

Törnqvist, G. (2012). The geography of creativity. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.

Torrance, E. P. (1977). Creativity in the Classroom; What Research Says to the Teacher. ERIC.

UNCTAD. (2008). Creative economy report 2008: The challenge of Assessing the Creative Economy: towards informed Policy-making. United Nation.

van der Spoel, E., Rozing, M. P., Houwing-Duistermaat, J. J., Eline Slagboom, P., Beekman, M., de Craen, A. J. M., … van Heemst, D. (2015). Association analysis of insulin-like growth factor-1 axis parameters with survival and functional status in nonagenarians of the Leiden Longevity Study. Aging, 7(11), 956–963. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Zachary, G. P. (2000). The Global Me: New Cosmopolitans and the Competitive Edge--picking Globalism’s Winners and Losers. PublicAffairs.