Modeling obstacles to the realization of knowledge-based urban development

Document Type : Research article

Authors

Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

10.22059/jurbangeo.2024.366572.1868

Abstract

ABSTRACT
The research aims to identify and analyze the challenges of knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz city, using a descriptive-analytical approach. The opinions of 20 experts were utilized to identify the factors and barriers hindering the realization of knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz city. The ISM interpretive-structural modeling and Mic-Mac software were employed to examine the data on eighteen factors categorized into four dimensions (institutional-planning, economic, social-cultural, and physical) that serve as significant barriers to the implementation of knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz. The findings revealed that the dominant and traditional political economy, along with rigid and unilateral approaches in policy-making, are the primary influential factors obstructing knowledge-based urban development. Additionally, citizens' reluctance to share knowledge and engage in communication, undervaluing knowledge acquisition and distribution, absence of a collaborative culture for knowledge management, citizen disconnection from current knowledge, underutilization of human capital, inadequate communication between universities and city management organizations for knowledge exchange, limited access to broadband and ICT services, digital divide, and unequal access to information and communication technology infrastructure, are among the key independent variables significantly impacting the city of Ahvaz
Extended Abstract
Introduction
In the knowledge era, Knowledge-Based Urban Development (KUBD) represents a novel approach to sustainable urban development. Strategies focused on knowledge-based development are crucial for fostering local economic growth in cities. Knowledge-based clusters, such as knowledge locations and techno poles, emphasize the importance of proximity in enhancing the value chain, promoting interaction among knowledge workers and innovators, enabling the sharing of knowledge and experience, and fostering synergistic development for both individuals and the city. Ahvaz, a major city in Iran, currently grapples with numerous urban challenges. Urban management in Ahvaz faces significant difficulties in enhancing citizens' quality of life and addressing the issues stemming from urban development. Despite the presence of an urban planning system in Ahvaz, the city still grapples with development issues and shortcomings in its development patterns and management approaches. As a result, there is a need to focus on urban development and transition towards utilizing knowledge-based activities to address these challenges. By implementing knowledge-based planning, steps can be taken to address some of the development issues in Ahvaz. Leveraging the natural and economic potential of Ahvaz, the adoption of knowledge-based approaches in dynamic urban development can lead to prosperity, vitality, and stability in the city's development process. Therefore, there is a need to shift and strengthen the perspective on urban development planning in Ahvaz towards knowledge-based development. Consequently, this research aims to address the question: What are the obstacles hindering the realization of knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz?
 
Methodology
The current study follows a "descriptive-analytical" methodology. The primary descriptive aspect involves gathering indicators and explanatory variables related to knowledge-based urban development through documentary research, interviews, and questionnaires. The statistical community for this research comprises experts and specialists, including university professors, municipal experts, and urban affairs professionals in Ahvaz, who possess theoretical and empirical knowledge about the research topic, particularly in relation to the case study of Ahvaz city.
 Initially, key variables in knowledge-based urban development were identified and collected from relevant sources. These variables were then scrutinized by research experts using a targeted Delphi method. Given the qualitative-exploratory and expert-oriented approach of the research, an exploratory sampling method was employed. This involved interviews and surveys of known and available members, followed by the snowball method to expand the sample size until theoretical saturation was achieved. Ultimately, 20 experts were included in the study. To analyze the data, eighteen significant obstacles to knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz city were identified using ISM interpretive-structural modeling. Subsequently, the Mic Mac software was utilized for further analysis.
 
Results and discussion
The research model comprises four levels, with the first level representing a centralized and traditional political economy, characterized by rigid and unilateral approaches in policy-making, which holds the most significant influence. The obstacles include citizens' reluctance to share knowledge, interact, and communicate with others; the failure to recognize the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge as a valuable asset; the absence of a collaborative culture based on trust for knowledge management; citizens' disconnection from current knowledge and inefficiency in its utilization; inadequate utilization of available human resources, particularly scientific and educated individuals; insufficient communication between universities and city management organizations for knowledge and technology exchange; inadequate access to broadband and ICT services, leading to a digital divide and unequal information and communication technology infrastructure access; insufficient infrastructures and facilities for knowledge transfer within the city; weak connectivity and information and communication technology infrastructure; minimal contribution of modern activities and fundamental knowledge at the city level due to limited economic resources and inadequate investment in communication and information infrastructure; lack of financial backing for entrepreneurial ventures and support for innovative individuals; and the presence of class disparities in income, job type, and educational level at the township level, all of which are the most influential factors at level 4.
 
Conclusions:
The primary barriers to achieving knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz city are primarily associated with the first and second levels. These levels pertain to the centralized and traditional political economy, inflexible and unilateral approaches in the policy-making process, the persistence of inappropriate management styles, short-sightedness, and the partiality of managers in dealing with knowledge management. These factors hold the greatest influence and are critical obstacles to the realization of knowledge-based urban development in Ahvaz city, necessitating serious consideration in any decision-making related to overcoming these barriers.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
 We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

Keywords


  1. Abedini, A., Khalili, A., khorram, F., & ghorbani, S. (2020). Feasibility study on the implementation of a knowledge-based city in Tabriz metropolis with a knowledge-based approach. Urban Structure and Function Studies7(24), 155-175. doi: 10.22080/usfs.2020.16690.1829. [In Persian].
  2. Ahvaz Municipality planning deputy. (2017). Third edition, Ahvaz: Ahvaz Municipality Public Relations and International Affairs Publications. [In Persian].
  3. Ali Akbari, E., & Akbari, M. (2019). Knowledge Based Urban Development; Development of Strategic Map of Tehran Metropolis. Geographical Urban Planning Research (GUPR)7(1), 151-170. doi: 10.22059/jurbangeo.2019.274413.1050. [In Persian].
  4. Aliakbari, E. (2020). Structural Analysis drving Forces Knowledge Based Urban Development Case study: Tehran Metropolis. Research and urban planning,11(42), 1-20. doi:20.1001.1.22285229.1399.11.42.1.2 [In Persian].
  5. Alraouf, A.A. (2018). Knowledge-Based Urban Development in the Middle East, Information Science Reference. 1st edition, March 2018. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-3734-2
  6. Amini, S., & Andalib, A. (2021). The basics of the creative city with the approach of knowledge-based urbanism, the third national conference towards knowledge-based urbanism and architecture, Tehran. [In Persian].
  7. Asadi, R., & Rezghi Shirsavar, H. (2019). Presenting the development model of knowledge-based companies for sustainable urban development (case study: Tehran City). Geography (Regional Planning)9(34), 599-614. [In Persian].
  8. Audretsch, D.B., Belitski, M., & Korosteleva, J. (2021). Cultural diversity and knowledge in explaining entrepreneurship in European cities. Small Bus Econ, 56(4), 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00191-4.
  9. Bahra, B., Pourjafar, M., & Rafieian, M. (2022). A Meta-Analysis of the Factors Effective on Placemaking the Contemporary Knowledge and Innovation Spaces. Town and Country Planning14(2), 491-522. doi: 10.22059/jtcp.2022.347618.670341. [In Persian].
  10. Behzadpour, E., Farzad Behtash, M. R., & Saeideh Zarabadi, Z. S. (2021). Explaining the Conceptual Model of Knowledge-Based Urban Development Based on Interpretive Structural Modeling Approach Case Study: Tehran Metropolis. Sustainable city4(2), 73-90. doi: 10.22034/jsc.2021.279668.1440 [In Persian].
  11. Bulu, M., Onder, M., & Aksakalli, V. (2014). Algorithm-embedded IT applications for an emerging knowledge city: Istanbul, Turkey. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(12), 5625–5635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.02.013.
  12. Cabrita, M., Cruz-Machado, V., & Cabrita, C. (2013). Managing creative industries in the context of knowledge-based urban development. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 4(4), 318–337. DOI:10.1504/IJKBD.2013.058524.
  13. Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., & Esposito, E. (2017). Environmental sustainability in the service industry of transportation and logistics service providers: Systematic literature review and research directions. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 53(4), 454–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.04.032.
  14. Chang, D.L., Sabatini-Marques, J., & DaCosta, E. (2018). Knowledge-based, smart and sustainable cities: a provocation for a conceptual framework. Journal of Open Innovation, 4(5), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40852-018-0087-2.
  15. Chica, J. E. (2016). Spatial clustering of knowledge-based industries in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area. Regional Studies. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 3(1), 321-329. DOI:10.1080/21681376.2016.1189848.
  16. Cigu, E. (2015). The making of knowledge cities in Romania. Procedia Economics and Finance, 32(22), 534 – 541. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01429-X.
  17. Damanbagh, S., sajadian, N., & Nemati, M. (2021). Analyzing the Role of Local-Spatial Differences in the Sense of Happiness among the Citizens of Ahvaz. Geography and Urban Space Development8(1), 205-224. doi: 10.22067/jgusd.2021.67749.1000. [In Persian].
  18. Dehghani, M., Haghighat Naeini, G., & Zebardast, E. (2021). Knowledge-Based Urban Development Stakeholder Analysis (Case Study: Isfahan City). Human Geography Research53(1), 323-341. doi: 10.22059/jhgr.2020.280961.1007921. [In Persian].
  19. Fitjar, R., & Timmermans, B. (2020). Knowledge bases and relatedness. A study of labour mobility in Norwegian regions. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New Avenues for regional innovation systems theoretical Advances, em- pirical cases and policy Lessons. New York: Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-71661-9_8.
  20. Hanafi Neiri, K., Porjabali, R., & Babaei, M. (2022). Requirements for the development of knowledge-based cities. Science and techniques of information management, 9(3),241-268. doi: 10.22091/stim.2022.8065.1771. [In Persian].
  21. Hu, T.S., Pan, S.C., & Lin, H.P. (2021). Development, Innovation, and Circular Stimulation for a Knowledge-Based City: Key Thoughts. Energies, 14(23), 79-99. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14237999.
  22. Humafar, M., Pourjafar, M., & Saidi Rizvani, N. (2017). Analysis of the spatial distribution pattern of knowledge-based activities in Tehran, Quarterly Journal of Urban Economics and Management, 6(2), 55-75. doi: 10.29252/iueam.6.22.57. [In Persian].
  23. Jumapour, M., Isa Lo, S., Godarzi, V., & Dosti Sabzi, B. (2016). Compilation of urban development strategies with a knowledge-based development approach (case study: Arak Industrial City). Journal of Urban Economics and Management, 5(20), 53-65. [In Persian].
  24. Khalili, A., & Dehghani, M. (2020). Appropriateness Analysis of the Cluster Approach in Knowledge-Based Urban Development of Isfahan. Journal of Iranian Architecture & Urbanism(JIAU)11(2), 205-222. doi: 10.30475/isau.2020.250746.1531. [In Persian].
  25. Liu, J., Cai, P.X., & Wang, F. F. (2020). Network structure evolution and influencing factors of collaborative knowledge innovation in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area urban agglomeration. Journal of Technology Economics, 39(5), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.1940922.
  26. Lonnqvist, A., Kapyla, J., Salonius, H., & Yigitcanlar, T. (2014). Knowledge That Matters: Identifying Regional Knowledge Assets of the Tampere Region. European Planning Studies, 22(10), 2011-2029. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.814621
  27. Pancholi, S., Yigitcanlar, T., & Guaralda, M. (2014). Urban knowledge and innovation spaces: concepts, conditions, and contexts. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 15-38.‌ https://eprints.qut.edu.au/72632/.
  28. Pancholi, S., Yigitcanlar, T., & Guaralda, M. (2015). Public space design of knowledge and innovation spaces: Learnings from Kelvin Grove Urban Village, Brisbane. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 1(1)13, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40852-015-0015-7.
  29. Pourramzan, A., Pourhossein Roshan, H., Ali Akbari, p. (2017). A knowledge city: Strategies for future development of Zanjan as a Sustainable and creative city, Stable City Quarterly, 9(35), 171-192. [In Persian].
  30. Tabibi, S. H., Rafieian, M., Majedi, H., & Ziari, Y. A. (2020). The Role of Knowledge-Based and Innovative Cities in Urban and Regional Development. Urban Planning Knowledge4(1), 19-32. doi: 10.22124/upk.2020.15004.1332. [In Persian].
  31. Vesali Azar Sharabiani, M. (2017). The Study of Relationship Between Social Capital and Knowledge-Based Urban Development. Science and Technology Policy Letters07(1), 17-30. doi: 20.1001.1.24767220.1396.07.1.5.5. [In Persian].
  32. Wang, X. (2009). Knowledge-based urban development in China. (Doctoral dissertation, Newcastle University).‌ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl.
  33. Yigitcanlar, T. (2011). Position paper: redefining knowledge-based urban development. International. Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 2(4), 340-356.‌https://doi.org/10.1504/IJKBD.2011.044343.
  34. Yigitcanlar, T. (2014). Innovating urban policymaking and planning mechanisms to deliver knowledge-based agendas: a methodological approach. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 5(3), 253-270.‌ https://doi.org/10.1504/IJKBD.2014.065300.
  35. Yigitcanlar, T., & Bulu, M. (2015). Dubaization of Istanbul: Insights from the knowledge-based urban development journey of an emerging local economy. Environment and Planning A, 47(1), 89-107.‌ DOI:10.1068/a130209p.
  36. Yigitcanlar, T., & Lönnqvist, A. (2013). Benchmarking knowledge-based urban development performance: Results from the international comparison of Helsinki. Cities, 31, 357-369.‌https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.11.005.
  37. Yigitcanlar, T., & Sarimin, M. (2015). Multimedia super corridor, Malaysia: Knowledge-based urban development lessons from an emerging economy. Vine, 45(1), 126-147.‌ doi/10.1108/VINE-06-2014-0041/full/html.
  38. Yigitcanlar, T., Edvardsson, I. R., Johannesson, H., Kamruzzaman, M. D., Ioppolo, G., & Pancholi, S. (2017). Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns. European Planning Studies, 25(12), 2272-2292.‌ https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1358699.
  39. Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., Buys, L., Ioppolo, G., Sabatini-Marques, J., da Costa, E. M., & Yun, J. J. (2018). Understanding ‘smart cities’: Intertwining development drivers with desired outcomes in a multidimensional framework. Cities, 81, 145-160.‌ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.04.003.
  40. Yigitcanlar, T., Lönnqvist, A., & Salonius, H. (2014). Analysis of a city-region from the knowledge perspective: Tampere, Finland. Vine, 44(3), 445-466.‌ doi/10.1108/VINE-09-2013-0056/full/html.
  41. Yigitcanlar, T., Xia, B., Cortese, T. T. P., & Sabatini-Marques, J. (2023). Understanding City 4.0: A Triple Bottom Line Approach. Sustainability, 16(1), 326.‌ https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010326.
  42. Yu, Y., & Lyu, L. (2023). Spatial pattern of knowledge innovation function among Chinese cities and its influencing factors. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 33(6), 1161-1184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-023-2124-8.