فصلنامه علمی پژوهشهای فضا و مکان در شهر

ارزیابی تأثیر رویکردهای پایداری در تبیین اصول شکل‌گیری باهمستان (مطالعۀ موردی: محلة سنگ‌تراش‌های اصفهان)

مقالات آماده انتشار

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

آرزو زائرین 1
رامتین مرتهب 1
نرگس سلطانی 2

1 گروه مهندسی معماری و شهرسازی، دانشکدة فنی و مهندسی، دانشگاه شهید اشرفی اصفهانی، اصفهان، ایران

2 گروه معماری و شهرسازی، دانشکده فنی و مهندسی،دانشگاه شهید اشرفی اصفهانی، اصفهان، ایران.

https://doi.org/10.22034/jspr.2026.2075241.1191
چکیده
ناپایداری در محلات یکی از مشکلاتی است که امروزه در شهرها رواج پیدا کرده است. با نگاهی به وضعیت و شرایط کنونی محله‌های امروزی می‌توان گفت فضایی که واقعاً بتوان آن را باهمستان نامید، در آن یافت نمی‌شود و اگر هم باشد، در اثر رشد نامناسب این فضاها کارکرد اجتماعی خود را از دست داده یا کمرنگ شده است. در واقع، چهارچوب‌‌هایی برای شناخت این ناپایداری در دانش بومی‌شدة ایران به چشم می‌خورد، اما به دست فراموشی سپرده شده و بر اساس نیازهای محلات و شهرهای مدرن به اصلاح امروزی نیاز دارد. به همین دلیل هدف پایة این پژوهش تدوین چهارچوبی برای روشن کردن مفاهیم پایداری در خصوص هنجارهای کلی و شاخص‌های سنجش وضعیت در سطح محله برای شهر اصفهان مشخص و راه‌حل‌هایی شده است. با این هدف، ابتدا مفهوم کلیدی پایداری در حیطة اجتماعی، اقتصادی و زیست‌محیطی شناسایی شده‌اند، سپس برای رسیدن از مرحلة سنجش به ادامة فرآیند، به تبیین شاخصه‌ها و سنجه‌های مربوطه پرداخته شده است. روش‌شناسی این پژوهش به‌صورت کیفی از طریق مردم‌نگاری تحلیلی‌ـ‌میدانی متکی بر مبنای تفسیری از طریق مشاهده (مشارکتی)، عکس‌برداری، فیلم‌برداری (غیرمداخله‌گر)، مصاحبه (غیرساختارمند) و یادداشت‌برداری و همچنین مبتنی بر تحلیل محتواست. نتایج به‌دست‌آمده بیانگر این بوده است که میزان مطلوبیت همة شاخص‌های استخراج‌شده در این مرکز محله دارای اهمیت بوده‌اند. در نهایت، راهکارهایی نیز در جهت پایداری آتی محله سنگ‌‌تراش‌ها ارائه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

پایداری‌
باهمستان
دگردیسی
محلة سنگ‌تراش‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Evaluating the Impact of Sustainability Approaches on the Principles of Community Formation: A Case Study of Sangtarashha Neighborhood, Isfahan

نویسندگان English

Arezoo Zaerin 1
Ramtin Mortaheb 1
Narges Soltani 2
1 Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Shahid Ashrafi Esfahani University, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Shahid Ashrafi Esfahani University, Isfahan, Iran.
چکیده English

Neighborhood-level unsustainability is a pervasive challenge in contemporary cities. Contemporary neighborhoods frequently lack the social, spatial, and institutional conditions necessary to function as resilient communities; where such conditions persist, they are often weakened by inappropriate spatial transformations. Indigenous knowledge in Iran contains conceptual resources for understanding and addressing these processes, but these resources have been partially neglected and require reinterpretation to align with modern urban contexts. This study develops a conceptual framework to clarify sustainability concepts and to define normative criteria and measurable indicators for assessing neighborhood sustainability in Isfahan. First, the study identifies core sustainability dimensions across social, economic, and environmental domains. Next, it operationalizes these dimensions by specifying indicators and metrics designed to move assessment toward a continuous, adaptive process. Employing a qualitative methodology grounded in analytical field ethnography and an interpretive approach, data were collected through participatory observation, non-intrusive photographic and video documentation, unstructured interviews, and field notes; data analysis followed systematic content-analysis procedures. Findings indicate that the extracted indicators exhibit substantial desirability within the Sangtarashha neighborhood center. Based on these results, the study proposes targeted interventions to enhance the neighborhood’s long-term sustainability. The proposed framework aims to be transferable to similar urban contexts and to inform policy and community-led initiatives.
Neighborhood instability constitutes a central and escalating problem in urban environments, yet scholarly and practical frameworks that integrate local knowledge with contemporary sustainability assessment tools remain limited—especially in the Iranian context. This research aims to fill that gap by developing a robust framework that synthesizes theoretical and empirical perspectives on sustainability and produces actionable norms and indicators for neighborhood-level assessment and intervention.
Keywords: Neighborhood sustainability; community formation; indigenous knowledge; Sangtarashha; Isfahan
Extended Abstract:
Background and Aim:
Neighborhood instability constitutes a central and escalating problem in urban environments, yet scholarly and practical frameworks that integrate local knowledge with contemporary sustainability assessment tools remain limited—especially in the Iranian context. This research aims to fill that gap by developing a robust framework that synthesizes theoretical and empirical perspectives on sustainability and produces actionable norms and indicators for neighborhood-level assessment and intervention.
Conceptual Framework:
The research adopts a tripartite conceptualization of sustainability—social, economic, and environmental—each operationalized through specific subdimensions. Social sustainability encompasses social cohesion, civic participation, place attachment, and cultural continuity. Economic sustainability includes local economic vitality, livelihood diversity, informal and formal economic opportunities, and resident economic resilience. Environmental sustainability covers the quality and accessibility of public space, ecological management, service provision, and adaptive infrastructural practices. The framework emphasizes iterative assessment: indicators are selected both for diagnostic clarity and for their capacity to inform ongoing, adaptive planning and community action.
Methodology:
A qualitative, analytical ethnographic approach was employed with an interpretive orientation. Primary data collection methods included:
• Participatory observation to capture everyday social interactions and spatial practices;
• Non-intrusive photographic and video documentation to record physical conditions and land-use patterns;
• Unstructured interviews with residents, local leaders, and stakeholders to elicit emic perspectives; and
• Detailed field notes for contextualization.
• Collected data were subjected to thematic content analysis, employing systematic coding procedures to identify patterns, strengths, vulnerabilities, and potential leverage points for intervention.
Findings:
Analysis revealed that the indicators derived from the framework corresponded strongly with residents’ perceptions and observable conditions in Sangtarashha. In particular, socio-cultural assets—such as localized networks of reciprocity, place-based identities, and informal institutions—emerged as prominent strengths that could be leveraged to support broader sustainability objectives. Economic indicators highlighted both opportunities (small-scale commerce, adaptive livelihoods) and constraints (limited access to formal employment and capital). Environmental indicators showed mixed outcomes: while some public spaces exhibited strong use-value and social importance, infrastructural and ecological deficits limited their full sustainability potential.
Conclusions and Recommendations:
The study concludes that combining indigenous knowledge with a structured, indicator-based framework provides a viable approach for diagnosing neighborhood sustainability and designing context-sensitive interventions. Recommendations include:
• Strengthening local institutions and community networks to harness social capital for collective action;
• Supporting microenterprises and local economic diversification through targeted financial and capacity-building programs;
• Implementing incremental, low-cost environmental interventions to improve public-space quality, water management, and service delivery; and
• Establishing participatory monitoring mechanisms that use the proposed indicators to guide iterative planning.
Implications and Future Research:
This framework contributes a practical tool for urban practitioners and planners seeking to integrate cultural-contextual knowledge into sustainability assessment. Future research should operationalize the indicators quantitatively, validate the framework across diverse neighborhoods, and pilot intervention packages with longitudinal evaluation to measure impacts over time.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Neighborhood sustainability
community formation
indigenous knowledge
Sangtarashha
Isfahan
 
1. Abboud, M. H., & Huwaish, L. T (2022). Significance of the urban observatory for urban development management in cities. In Technologies and Materials for Renewable Energy, Environment and Sustainability (TMREES21Gr). https://doi.org/ 10.1063/5.0092369
2. Ahangaran, Ali (2016). The Position of Islamic City Councils in the Urban Management System of Iran. Municipalities Monthly, No. 75. https://doi.org/ 20.1001.1.22285229.1394.6.22.7.3. [in persian]
3. Atiyeh Yousefi and Mehdi Abdul Hamid (2024). Presenting the Policy and Governance Observatory Model as a Facilitator of Smart and Evidence-Based Governance, Public Management Research, 32-33. https://doi.org/10.22111/jmr. 2024.46105.6029. [in persian]
4. Bixler, R. P., Lieberknecht, K., Leite, F., Felkner, J., Oden, M., Richter, S. M., Atshan, S., Zilveti, A., & Thomas, R (2019). An observatory framework for metropolitan change: Understanding urban social–ecological–technical systems in Texas and beyond. Sustainability, 11 (19), 5364. https://doi. org/10. 3390/su11195364.
5. Caiaffa, W. T., & Friche, A. A (2019). Observatory for urban health in Belo Horizonte city. Urban Health, 96 (Suppl. 1), 1–5. https://doi. org/ 10.1590/0102-311X00104414
6. Calvo, M., & Sclater, M (2020). Co-design for social innovation and organisational change: Developing horizontal relationships in a social enterprise through walking. Discern: International Journal of Design for Social Change, Sustainable Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1 (1), 78–98. https://doi.org /345813312_Co.
7. Cao, H., & Kang, C. I (2022). A citizen participation model for co-creation of public value in a smart city. Journal of Urban Affairs, 46 (5), 905–924. https://doi. org/10. 1080/07352166. 2022. 2094799.
8. Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., & Nijkamp, P (2011). Smart cities in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, 18 (2), 65–82. https: //doi. org/10. 1080/10630732. 2011. 601117.
9. Cazacu, S., Hansen, N. B., & Schouten, B (2020, December 2–4). Empowerment approaches in digital civics. In Proceedings of the 32nd Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (OzCHI ’20) (pp. 1–10). ACM. https://doi. org/10. 1145/3441000. 3441069.
10. Contini, G., & Peruzzini, M (2022). Sustainability and Industry 4. 0: Definition of a set of key performance indicators for manufacturing companies. Sustainability, 14 (17), 11004. https://doi. org/10. 3390/su141711004.
11. Davern, M., Both, A., Murray, K. B., Roberts, R. J., & Norzahari, F (2023). Liveability research creating real world impact: Connecting urban planning and public health through the Australian Urban Observatory. Cities & Health, 7, 765–778. https://doi. org/10. 1080/23748834. 2022. 2037344.
12. Dickey, A., Acuto, M., & Washbourne, C (2021). Urban observatories: A comparative review. Connected Cities Lab, University of Melbourne. https://doi. org/10. 1080/07352166. 2025. 2473963.
13. Dobler, G., Bianco, F. B., Sharma, M. S., Karpf, A., Baur, J., Ghandehari, M., Wurtele, J. S., & Koonin, S. E (2019). The Urban Observatory: A multi-modal imaging platform for the study of dynamics in complex urban systems. Remote Sensing, 11 (13), 1426. https://doi. org/10. 3390/rs11131426.
14. E-Fatima, K., et al (2022). Adoption and influence of robotic process automation in beef supply chains. Logistics, 6 (3), 48. https://doi. org/10. 3390/logistics6030048.
15. Eskandari, Ali Akbar. Municipal Affairs Department, East Azerbaijan Governorate, Tabriz 1999. [in persian]
16. Fernandes Barata, A., Harland, R. G., Kim, M., Larimian, T., Natapov, A., Palaiologou, F., & Weightman, J (2025). Learning from the participatory practices of urban observatories to co-create a new town observatory in Loughborough, UK. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1–17. https: //doi. org/10. 1080/07352166. 2025. 2473963 .
17. Fouad Alasiri Evaluating the capacity of local authorities in implementing participatory urban planning: The case of Khobar City, Saudi Arabia. https://doi. org/10. 3390/app12052314.
18. Galabo, R., & Cruickshank, L (2022). Making it better together: A framework for improving creative engagement tools. CoDesign, 18 (4), 503–525. https://doi. org/10. 1080/15710882. 2021. 1912777.
19. Gomes, P., et al (2022). Artificial intelligence-based methods for business processes: A systematic literature review. Applied Sciences, 12 (5), 2314. https://doi. org/10. 3390/app12052314.
20. Hajdarowicz, I (2022). Does participation empower? The example of women involved in participatory budgeting in Medellín. Journal of Urban Affairs, 44 (1), 22–37. https://doi. org/10. 1080/07352166. 2018. 1431048 . 1431048.
21. Hubinský, T., & Legény, J (2022). Microclimatic factors in urban development: The setup of an environmental observatory at the FAD STU. Architecture Papers of the Faculty of Architecture and Design STU, 27, 25–32. https://doi. org/10. 1088/1755-1315/1015/1/012012.
22. Hunt, A., & Specht, D (2019). Crowdsourced mapping in crisis zones: Collaboration, organisation and impact. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 4 (1), 1–11. https://doi. org/10. 1186/s41018-018-0048-1.
23. Hurtig, M (2023). Co-designing for whom? Exploring the benefits of city-led participatory creative practices in disadvantaged neighbourhoods of Madrid. In Proceedings of the International Association of Societies of Design Research (IASDR) Congress 2023 (pp. 1–15). https://doi. org/10. 21606/iasdr. 2023. 224.
24. Kitchin, R. (2022). Urban Data Politics: From Governance to Ethics. Routledge.
25. Konstantia, B., Evdokia, M., Giorgos, G., Konstantinos, G., Anastasia, I., Dimitris, K., Chrisos, M. K., & Konstantinos, T (2022). Sustainable urban development observatory of Thessaloniki: Lessons learnt from the first year of operation. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1015, 012012. https://doi. org/10. 1088/1755-1315/1015/1/012012.
26. Kramarz, M., Dohn, K., & Przybylska, E (2025). The role of the transport and logistics observatory in gathering knowledge for sustainable urban logistics development. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management. https://doi. org/10. 1080/09505431. 2024. 2317236.
27. Matheus, R., Janssen, M., & Maheshwari, D. (2020). Data science empowering the public: Data-driven dashboards for transparent and accountable decision-making in smart cities. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101284.
28. Metwally, E., & Samir, E (2023). A methodological framework for setting up the urban observatory for informed cities: Case study of El Tor City, South Sinai, Egypt. Mansoura Engineering Journal. .https://doi. org/10. 1068/b2669.
29. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (2021). Towns deals: Full list of 101 offers. UK Government. https://www. gov. uk/government/publications/town-deals-full-list-of-101-offers. https://doi. org/10. 1080/23748834. 2022. 2037344.
30. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (2023). Towns fund. UK Government. https://doi. org/10. 1080/07352166. 2022. 2094799.
31. Minniti, S., & Magaudda, P (2024). The ‘obligatory passage point’ in knowledge co-production: Italy’s participatory environmental monitoring platform. Science as Culture, 1–18. https://doi. org/10. 1080/09505431. 2024. 2317236.
32. Momeni, Farshad, 2019. "Extreme Breathing into Commercialism", Balance of Needs of the Iranian Economy, August 2019. [in persian]
33. Noradila Rusli(2023). A review on worldwide urban observatory systems' data analytics.
34. North, Douglas C.; Wallace, Jean Josepho; Weingast, Barry. R. (2006) A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Written Human History, translated by Jafar Khairkhahan, Political Economy of Comprehensive Change, No. 3, pp. 151-92 [in persian].
35. Office of Architecture and Urban Design, Deputy of Architecture and Urban Development, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. “Reforming the Urban Development Management System in Iran Based on a Strategic Approach”, 2008 [in persian].
36. Patanè, D., Tusa, G., Yang, W., Astuti, A., Colino, A., Costanza, A., D’Anna, G., Di Prima, S., Fertitta, G., Mangiagli, S., Martino, C., & Torrisi, O (2022). The urban seismic observatory of Catania (Italy): A real-time seismic monitoring at urban scale. Remote Sensing, 14 (11), 2583. https://doi. org/10. 3390/rs14112583.
37. Pavlović, R., Cvetković, Z., Simić, Z., Damljanović, G., Samurović, S., Rovčanin, B., Lukić, D., & Bjelajac, D (2024). Urban Observatory of Belgrade. In Book of Abstracts: XIV Serbian-Bulgarian Astronomical Conference. https://doi. org/10. 3390/rs14112583.
38. Plikynas, D., et al (2022). Indoor-guided navigation for people who are blind: Crowdsourcing for route mapping and assistance. Applied Sciences, 12 (1), 523. https://doi. org/10. 3390/app12010523.
39. Pløger, J (2001). Public participation and the art of governance. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28 (2), 219–241. https://doi. org/10. 1068/b2669.
40. Pourtaheri, Mehdi (2013) Application of multi-criteria decision-making methods in geography, Tehran: Organization for the Study and Compilation of University Humanities Books (SAMAT) [in persian].
41. Powells, G., & Blake, L (2016). Urban science networks and local economy: The case of Newcastle upon Tyne. In J. Evans, A. Karvonen, & R. Raven (Eds.), The experimental city (pp. 137–149). Routledge. https: //doi. org/10. 3390/app12010523.
42. Rahimi, Mohammad and Nazarian Asghar (2012) "Analysis of the Management Model of Tehran City", Human Geography Research, No. 81, Fall 2012, pp. 111-126 [in persian].
43. Rajaei, Amir; Zabihollah Moghadam; Atefeh Poudineh Moghadam and Ehsan Sargolzaei, 2017, Review of the role of data mining in smart cities, Fourth National Conference on Information Technology, Computer and Telecommunications, Mashhad, Torbat Heydariyeh University. https://civilica.com/doc/668750 [in persian].
44. Razavian, Mohammad Taqi and Frank Saeedi and Mina Salehi, 2013. Urban Management in the World. Imam Reza University Press [in persian].
45. Rusli, M., et al. (2023). A Comparative Analysis of Global Urban Observatories: Focus on Data-to-Policy Translation. Journal of Smart Cities and Governance, 10(1), 45-62.
46. Rusli, N., Ling, G. H., Mohd Hussain, M. H., Mohamed Salib, N. S., Abu Bakar, S. Z., & Othman, M. H (2023). A review on worldwide urban observatory systems’ data analytics themes: Lessons learned for Malaysia Urban Observatory (MUO). Journal of Urban Management.
47. Schueller, S. K., Li, Z., Bliss, Z., Roake, R., & Weiler, B (2023). How informed design can make a difference: Supporting insect pollinators in cities. Land, 12 (4), 812. [https://doi. org/10. 3390/land12040812.https://doi. org/10. 3390/land12040812.
48. Stanek, S., Sołtyśik-Piorunkiewicz, A., & Szary, M (2022). The knowledge components in DDMKCC model as the catalyst of a hybrid DSS: The IT company case study. https://doi. org/10. 1186/s41018-018-0048-1.
49. Stephan Voss, Julia Bauer, Michaela Coenen , Caroline Jung-Sievers, Graham Moore, Eva Rehfuess )2025 May(, Logic models for the evaluation of complex interventions in public health: lessons learnt from a staged development process, 24; 25(1):1923. https://doi. org/ 10.1186/s12889-025-23171-8.
50. themes: Lessons learned for Malaysia Urban Observatory (MUO) Journal of Urban Management 12 (2023) 231–254.
51. Tomić, Z., Stanković, M., Mitrović, J., & Gajić, J (2024). Project of first urban astronomical observatory in Kruševac. Publications of the Astronomical Observatory of Belgrade.
52. Tonkiss, F., & Esposito, C. (2023). Urban Data and Institutional Reflexivity. Urban Studies Journal, 60(5), 890-907. https://doi. org/10. 1080/17535069. 2019. 1651899.
53. UK Parliament (2022). What makes a city? [https://commonslibrary. parliament. uk/what-makes-a-city. https://commonslibrary. parliament. uk/what-makes-a-city. https://doi. org/10. 35844/001c. 13244.
54. UN-Habitat (2020). A guide to setting up an urban observatory. https://unhabitat. org/a-guide-to-setting-up-an-urban-observatory. https://unhabitat. org/a-guide-to-setting-up-an-urban-observatory.
55. UN-Habitat. (2023). Global Urban Observatory Network: Strategic Framework for Data Governance. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://doi. org/10. 1080/15710882. 2021. 1912777.
56. Vaughan, L. M., & Jacquez, F (2020). Participatory research methods: Choice points in the research process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1). https://doi. org/10. 35844/001c. 13244.
57. Vitale, G., D’Alessandro, A., Benedetto, A. D., Figlioli, A., Costanzo, A., Speciale, S., Piattoni, Q., & Cipriani, L (2022). Urban seismic network based on MEMS sensors: The experience of the seismic observatory in Camerino (Marche, Italy). Sensors, 22 (6), 2214. https://doi. org/10. 3390/s22062214.
58. Wan, Q., et al (2023). A hybrid decision support system with golden cut and bipolar q-ROFSs for evaluating the risk-based strategic priorities of fintech lending for clean energy projects. Financial Innovation, 9 (1), 1–25. https://doi. org/10. 1186/s40854-023-00428-5.
59. Washbourne, C., Culwick, C., Acuto, M., Blackstock, J. J., & Moore, R (2021). Mobilising knowledge for urban governance: The case of the Gauteng City-Region Observatory. Urban Research & Practice, 14 (1), 27–29. https://doi. org/10. 1080/17535069. 2019. 1651899.
60. Washbourne, C., Culwick, C., Acuto, M., Blackstock, J. J., & Moore, R. A (2019). Mobilising knowledge for urban governance: The case of the Gauteng City-Region Observatory. Urban Research & Practice, 14 (1), 27–49. https://doi. org/10. 1080/17535069. 2019. 1651899.
61. Wolf, A., et al. (2025). The Institutional Barrier: Case Study of Smart Columbus Operating System Failure. International Journal of Urban Systems, 15(2), 112-130. https://doi. org/10. 1186/s40854-023-00428-5.
62. World Bank. (2021). The Global Urban Data Charter: Principles for Sustainable Data Sharing. World Bank Group. https://doi. org/10. 1080/07352166. 2018.
فصلنامه علمی پژوهشهای فضا و مکان در شهر

مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده
انتشار آنلاین از 21 بهمن 1404

صفحه اصلی

ارسال مقاله

تماس با ما