تحلیل شاخص‌های شهر دوستدار کودک در کلان‌شهر اهواز

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی - کاربردی

نویسندگان

گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

چکیده

فضاهای عمومی از قبیل معابر، پارک‌ها و زمین‌های بازی، عرصه‌ای برای اجتماعی شدن کودکان محسوب می‌شود. آماده‌سازی فضای شهر برای کودکان هم مسئولیت‌های اجتماعی آنان را برای زندگی شهری بالابرده و هم باعث می‌شود که آنان در آینده بیشتر به محیط و فضاهای شهری احترام بگذارند و در حفظ و نگهداری آن بکوشند. به همین منظور پژوهش حاضر باهدف تحلیل شاخص‌های شهر دوستدار کودک در کلان‌شهر اهواز تدوین‌شده است. به لحاظ هدف، این پژوهش در زمره تحقیقات کاربردی– نظری و به لحاظ ماهیت و روش، در زمره تحقیقات توصیفی– تحلیلی است. نتایج شاخص‌های برازش مدل تحلیل عاملی مرتبه اول حاکی از تأیید تمامی شاخص‌های (ایمنی و سهولت تردد کودکان؛ امنیت کودکان؛ فضای شهربازی کودکان؛ دسترسی به خدمات، آموزش و فرهنگ؛ و شهر دوستدار کودک) می‌باشد. همچنین طبق نتایج به‌دست‌آمده از معادلات ساختاری می‌توان گفت که ضریب مسیر بین ایمنی و سهولت تردد کودکان؛ امنیت کودکان؛ فضای شهربازی کودکان؛ دسترسی به خدمات، آموزش و فرهنگ؛ و شهر دوستدار کودک به ترتیب برابر با 244/0؛ 176/0؛ 225/0 و 194/0؛ می‌باشد و چون این مقادیر بیشتر از 96/1 ± است؛ لذا رابطه همه شاخص‌ها با شهر دوستدار کودک معنادار می‌باشد. نتایج آزمون فریدمن نیز نشان داد که سطح معناداری به‌دست‌آمده از آزمون فریدمن کمتر از 05/0 می‌باشد، درنتیجه بین میانگین رتبه متغیرهای پژوهش در سطح 95 درصد اطمینان تفاوت وجود دارد (001/0 = p)؛ به‌عبارت‌دیگر اولویت شاخص‌های شهر دوستدار کودک در مناطق هشتگانه شهر اهواز از دیدگاه پاسخگویان یکسان نبود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analyzing the child friendly city indicators in Ahvaz metropolis

نویسندگان [English]

  • Masoumeh Ahmadvand
  • Zahra Soltani
  • majid goodarzi
Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
چکیده [English]

A B S T R A C T
Public spaces such as sidewalks, parks and playgrounds are places for socializing children. Preparing the urban space for children both increases their social responsibilities for urban life, makes them more respectful of the urban environment and spaces in the future, and also more diligent in its maintenance. For this purpose, the present study has been compiled with the aim of analyzing the child friendly city indicators in Ahvaz Metropolis.The present Study is applied-theoretical in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of nature and method. The method of data collection is documentary and field. The results of the fit indices of the first-order factor analysis model indicate the confirmation of all indicators (children’s safety and ease of movement; children’s security; children's playground space; access to services, education and culture; and child friendly city).According to the results obtained from structural equations, it can also be said that the path coefficient between safety and ease of children's movement; children’s security; children's playground space; access to services, education and culture; and child friendly city are respectively equal to 0.244,; 176/0; 225/0 and 194/0; And because these values are greater than 1.96; Therefore, the relationship of all indicators with the child friendly city is significant. The results of Friedman test also showed that the significance level obtained from Friedman test is less than 0.05, so there is a difference between the mean rank of research variables at 95% confidence level (p = 0.001); In other words, the priority of child friendly city indicators in the eight districts of Ahvaz was not the same from the perspective of research samples.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Public spaces such as sidewalks, parks and playgrounds are places for socializing children. Preparing the urban space for children both increases their social responsibilities for urban life, makes them more respectful of the urban environment and spaces in the future, and also more diligent in its maintenance. A suitable urban space largely provides security and the presence of the child, and an inappropriate urban space eliminates it and creates all kinds of harms and social problems. In fact, public spaces such as sidewalks, parks and playgrounds are places for socializing children. Preparing the urban space for children both increases their social responsibilities for urban life, makes them more respectful of the urban environment and spaces in the future, and also more diligent in its maintenance. For this purpose, the present study has been compiled with the aim of analyzing the child friendly city indicators in Ahvaz Metropolis.
 
Methodology
The present Study is applied-theoretical in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of nature and method. The method of data collection is documentary and field. The statistical population of the present study consists of residents of the eight districts of Ahvaz, which according to the 2016 census; their number is as shown in the table below. The sample size is calculated using the Cochran's formula. The sampling method was also done randomly with classes proportional to the volume.
Data analysis and answers to research questions were performed using structural equations, one-sample T-test techniques and Friedman test.
 
Results and Discussion
The results of the fit indices of the first-order factor analysis model indicate the confirmation of all indicators (children’s safety and ease of movement; children’s security; children's playground space; access to services, education and culture; and child friendly city).According to the results obtained from structural equations, it can also be said that the path coefficient between safety and ease of children's movement; children’s security; children's playground space; access to services, education and culture; and child friendly city are respectively equal to 0.244,; 176/0; 225/0 and 194/0; And because these values are greater than 1.96; Therefore, the relationship of all indicators with the child friendly city is significant. The results of Friedman test also showed that the significance level obtained from Friedman test is less than 0.05, so there is a difference between the mean rank of research variables at 95% confidence level (p = 0.001); In other words, the priority of child friendly city indicators in the eight districts of Ahvaz was not the same from the perspective of research samples.
 
Conclusion
Indicators of children’s safety and ease of movement, children’s security, children's playground space, access to services, education and culture, child friendly city are the indicators that define child friendly city in Ahvaz. The fit of the model is desirable according to the path coefficients obtained from the relationship of expression of the indicators. There is also a difference between the observed value of the research variables and the mean of the null hypothesis, and the observed value is higher than the hypothetical mean. As a result of the variables of children’s safety and ease of movement, children’s security, urban space and children's play, access to services, education and culture and child friendly city based on stockholders' perspective is in a favorable situation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Urban Planning
  • Urban Spaces
  • Child Friendly City
  • Ahvaz Metropolis
  1. خزایی، مصطفی و خزایی، سارا. (1398). تحلیلی بر شهر دوستدار کودک. جغرافیا و روابط انسانی، 2 (2)، 232-220.
  2. سجادیان، ناهید و دامن باغ، صفیه، (1400). تحلیل جغرافیایی نقش مکان بر احساس نشاط شهروندان اهواز بر اساس شهر شاد. پژوهش‌های جغرافیای برنامه‌ریزی شهری، 9(3)، 799- 761.
  3. علیزاده، هادی. (1400). تحلیل و شناخت ظرفیت تاب‌آوری زیرساخت‌های حیاتی شهری بر اساس مدل چرخة سازگاری تاب‌آوری (RAC) در کلان‌شهر اهواز. پژوهش‌های جغرافیای برنامه‌ریزی شهری، 9(4)، 1123 –
  4. نصیری نسب رفسنجانی، مامک و حبیب، فرح. (1387). طراحی فضای شهری به‌مثابه ابزار آموزشی برای کودکان؛ نمونه مورد: ایالات‌متحده آمریکا - نیویورک. فصلنامه علوم و تکنولوژی محیط‌زیست، 10(4)، 111- 101.
  5. کربلایی حسینی غیاثوند، ابوالفضل و سهیلی، جمال‌الدین. (1392). بررسی ویژگی‌های شهر دوست‌داشتنی از نگاه کودکان (مطالعه موردی: منطقه دو شهرداری قزوین). فصلنامه مطالعات شهری، 3(9)، 68-59.
  6. کامل‌نیا، حامد و حقیر، سعید. (1388). الگوه‌های طراحی محیط در شهر دوستدار کودک (نمونه موردی: شهر دوستدار کودک بم). فصلنامه باغ‌نظر، 6(12)، 88- 77.
  7. قره‌بیگلو، مینو. (1391). نقش عوامل محیطی در پرورش خلاقیت کودکان. نظر، 4(19)، 91- 86.
  8. نوش‌زاده، صالح و اسماعیلی، الهام. (1398). طراحی محله با رویکرد شهر دوستدار کودک؛ نمونه موردی: محله سرجنگلداری 2 کرمان. فصلنامه علمی تخصصی مطالعات طراحی شهری و پژوهش‌های شهری، 6(9)، 92- 85.
  9. قاسمی، زهرا؛ بمانیان، محمدرضا و صارمی، حمیدرضا. (1399). مسکن دوستدار کودک با تأکید بر توسعه پایدار (نمونه موردی: منطقه 1 شهر تهران). فصلنامه نگرش‌های نو در جغرافیای انسانی، 1(49)، 296-284.
  10. رشیدکلویر، حجت‌الله؛ کریمی آذری، امیرضا و پوررضا، سیدهادی. (1399). ارزیابی ایجاد مؤلفه‌های شهر دوستدار کودک در بندر انزلی. دانش شهرسازی، 3(12)، 65- 51.
  11. مطلبی، قاسم؛ ضرغامی، اسماعیل و باقری، حسین. (1400). مؤلفه‌های مرتبط با رضایتمندی شهروندان از طریق توسعه‌های محیط دوستدار کودک (مطالعه موردی: منطقه یک تهران). فصلنامه علمی آموزش محیط‌زیست و توسعه پایدار، 9(3)، 146- 133.
  12. ابراهیمی، حمیدرضا؛ سعیدی رضوانی، نوید و معانی منجیلی، آرزو. (1390). تدوین اصول طراحی فضاهای بازی کودکان با تأکید بر گروه سنی 5 تا 12 سال (مطالعه موردی: رشت). باغ‌نظر، 8(19)، 42- 31.
  13. شیخ دره نی، فرشته. (1396). بررسی میزان تاب‌آوری اقتصادی و نهادی شهر اهواز در برابر زلزله؛ مطالعه موردی: مطالعه تطبیقی محله‌های امانیه و کیان‌پارس. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده علوم زمین و GIS، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز.
  14. H. (2022). Analyzing and Recognizing Urban Critical Infrastructure Resilience Capacity Based on Resilience Adaptive Cycle (RAC) In Ahvaz Metropolis. Geographical Urban Planning Research, 9 (4), 1103-1123. [In Persian].
  15. Arab Urban Development Institute. (2013). Building Child Friendly Cities in the Mena Region Resources for Implementers. International Review of Education, 59(4), 489-504.
  16. Brown, C., De Lannoy, A., McCracken, D., Gill, T., Grant, M., Wright, H., & Williams, S. (2019). Special issue: child-friendly cities. Cities & Health, 3 (1), 1-7.
  17. Carroll, P., Witten, K., Kearns, R., & Donovan, Ph. (2015). Kids in the City: Children's Use and Experiences of Urban Neighbourhoods in Auckland, New Zealand. Journal of Urban Design, 20(4), 417-436.
  18. Ebrahimi, H., Saidi Rizvani, N., & Maani Manjili, A. (2011). Compilation of the design principles of children's play spaces with an emphasis on the age group of 5 to 12 years (case study: Rasht). Bagh Nazar, 8(19), 31-42. [In Persian].
  19. Gharebeigloo, M. (2012). The Role of Environmental Effects on Developing Creativity in Children. Manzar, 4(19), 86- 91. [In Persian].
  20. Ghasemi, Z., Bamanian, M., & Sarmi, H. (2019). Child-friendly housing with an emphasis on sustainable development (case example: District 1 of Tehran). New Perspectives in Human Geography Quarterly, 1(49), 296-284. [In Persian].
  21. Gökmen, H., & Gülay Taþçý, B. (2016). Children’s views about Child Friendly City: A case study from Izmir. Megaron, 11(4), 469-482.
  22. Kamelnia, H., & Haghir, S. (2009). Design Patterns of Green Space in CFC. (Casae Study: Child Friendly City of BAM). Bagh-e Nazar, 6(12), 77-88. [In Persian].
  23. Karbalai Hosseini Ghiathund, A., & Sohaili, J. (2014). Lovely city investigated the characteristics of children looked (Case study: the two municipal district of Qazvin). Urban studies, 3(9), 59-68. [In Persian].
  24. Khazaei, M., & Khazaei, S. (2018). An Analysis of the Child-Friendly City. Geography and Human Relations, 9 (3), 220-232. [In Persian].
  25. Li, M., & Li, J. (2017). Analysis of methods of allocating grass space for the design of child –friendly cities: A case study of Changsha. Procedia Engineering, 198, 790-801.
  26. Melabi, Q., Zarghami, I., & Bagheri, H. (1400). Components related to citizens' satisfaction through child-friendly environment developments (Case study: District 1 of Tehran). Scientific Quarterly of Environmental Education and Sustainable Development, 9(3), 133-146. [In Persian].
  27. Nasiri Nasab Rafsanjani, M & Habib, F. (2008). Urban space design as an educational tool for children; Case Study: USA - New York. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 10 (4), 110-111. [In Persian].
  28. Noushzadeh, S., & Esmaili, E. (2018). Neighborhood design with a child-friendly city approach; Case example: Sarjangaldari 2 neighborhood, Kerman. Specialized scientific quarterly of urban design studies and urban researches, 6(9), 85-92. [In Persian].
  29. Prihantini, P., & Kurniawati, W. (2019). Mapping of Child Friendly Parks Availability for Supporting Child Friendly City in Semarang. The 3rd Geoplanning
    International Conference on Geomatics and Planning, IOP Conf, Series: Earth and
    Environmental Science, 313,
  30. Rashid Kalvir, H., Karimi Azari, A., & Pourreza, S. (2019). Evaluation of the creation of child-friendly city components in Anzali Port. Danesh Shahrzazi, 3(12), 51-65. [In Persian].
  31. Riggio, E. (2002). Child friendly cities: good governance in the best interests of the child. Environment & Urbanization, 14 (2): 45-58.
  32. Sajadian, N., & Damanbagh, S. (2021). Geographical analysis of the effect place (objective environment) on the sense of Happiness of Ahvaz citizens based on the happy city approach. Geographical Urban Planning Research, 9 (3), 761-799. [In Persian].
  33. Saridar Masri, S. (2017). Integrating youth in city planning: Developing a participatory tool toward a child-friendly vision of Eastern Wastani–Saida. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 57(2), 1-13.
  34. Saumel, I., Frauke, W., & Kowarik, I. (2015). Toward Livable and Healthy Urban Streets: Roadside Vegetation Provides Ecosystem Services Where People Live and move. Environmental Science and Policy, 62 (3), 24-33.
  35. Sawsan, S.M. (2017). Integrating youth in city planning: developing a participatory tool toward a child-friendly vision of eastern wastani-saida. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 1(6), 1-13.
  36. Sheikh Dareh Ni, F. (2016). Investigating the level of economic and institutional resilience of Ahvaz city against earthquakes; Case study: A comparative study of Amaniye and Kian Pars neighborhoods. Master's Thesis of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Earth Sciences and GIS, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz. [In Persian].
  37. Torres, J. (2009). Children & cities: planning to grow together. Document in a collection, Ottawa. The Vanier institute of the family.
  38. & Child Watch. (2011). the Child Friendly Community Assessment Tools. A Facilitator’s Guide to the Local Assessment of Children’s Rights.
  39. (2004). Building Child Friendly Cities a Framework for Action. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.
  40. (b2017). Child friendly cities and communities initiative. toolkit for national committees.
  41. Vander Gaaf, S. (2020). Child – friendly city and smart city premises in contention.
  42. Witten, K., Kearns, R., & Carrol, P. (2015). Urban Inclusion as Wellbeing: Exploring Children's Accounts of Confronting Diversity on Inner City Streets. Social Science and Medicine, 133, 349-357.
  43. Yao, S., & Xiaoyan, L. (2017). Exploration on ways of research and construction of Chinese child-friendly City. A Case study of Changsha. Procedia engineering, 198, 699-706.