Bilingual
En/Fa
Geographical Research is Published in both Persian and English Full-text.
Volume 37, Issue 1 (2022)
GeoRes 2022, 37(1): 101-110 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2021/12/1 | Accepted: 2022/01/3 | Published: 2022/01/22
Received: 2021/12/1 | Accepted: 2022/01/3 | Published: 2022/01/22
How to cite this article
Davoodi S, Hafez Rezazadeh M, Karimian Bostani M. Community–Based Managerial Role in Socio-Economic Sustainability of Zabol, Iran. GeoRes 2022; 37 (1) :101-110
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1260-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1260-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Zahedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zahedan, Iran
2- Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Zahedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zahedan, Iran ,rezazdeh2008@gmail.com
2- Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Zahedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zahedan, Iran ,
Full-Text (HTML) (3 Views)
Introduction
The history of urban management science dates back to the emergence of cities and the necessity to develop principles, regulations, and laws governing human life within biological, psychological, and social contexts [Salari Sadroi & Kiani, 2018: 38; Ziari et al., 2008: 213; Kurdi, 2006: 22]. Currently, the concept of urban management is discussed within systematic management theories, whose basic principles include proper operational practices, social responsiveness, and flexibility, all of which are equally applicable. Urban management should be capable of responding to and overcoming urban limitations and challenges in the best possible way [Ziari et al., 2008: 213].
To overcome the problems and issues of urbanization and urban planning, various theories have been proposed, among which the theory of sustainable urban development is notable. This theory emphasizes comprehensive development across multiple dimensions, including the three main dimensions: social, economic, and environmental, and revolves around the human-environment axis. It focuses on economic development with environmental considerations and social justice [Rezaei & Negin Naji, 2015: 70]. Sustainable development is also a process that expands people’s choices, enhances participatory democracy, and empowers citizens to have a voice in decisions that shape their lives [Saraei & Moayedfar, 2010: 49]. It creates opportunities for people to utilize and extend their full potential.
In recent decades, many organizations and institutions involved in urban management and planning worldwide have emphasized promoting a participatory approach to encourage bottom-up management and planning and empower neighborhoods for developmental actions [Hajipour, 2006: 37; Hosseinikhah et al., 2015: 131]. Decision-making and problem-solving in urban issues have increasingly relied on the participation of local communities to ensure citizens' welfare [Rezazadeh & Selseleh, 2002: 82]. In today’s urban society, neighborhoods are the fundamental urban elements and the interface between urban management and citizens for achieving sustainable urban development [Khakpour et al., 2019: 199].
Neighborhood development refers to a process by which the community’s potential assets are mobilized and utilized to improve the quality of life for its residents [Sanaee et al., 2021: 140; Sharpour, 2004: 289]. To achieve neighborhood-level sustainability, which is based on citizen participation in development programs, capacity-building is essential. Neighborhood-level capacity-building can be realized through the recognition of social capital and its influencing factors. Therefore, measuring social capital at the neighborhood level and understanding how it is reproduced to assist citizens in achieving sustainable development is necessary. Social capital can be considered one of the characteristics of local development, being a primary element of social development [Abbaszadeh, 2012].
Mobilization of groups, collective action, strengthening and developing the foundations of democracy within the community (neighborhood), fostering self-confidence at individual and local levels, increasing indigenous and local leadership, and creating conditions where social problems are solved by neighborhood members themselves are among the key aspects [Javadzadeh & Alavi, 2016: 84; Nikpour, 2016: 138]. It should be noted that the concept of the neighborhood in Islamic texts is mainly presented in the context of neighborly relations and associated rights, much of which relates to social capital emphasized in today’s world [Sanaee et al., 2021: 140].
Thus, the necessity of “utilizing neighborhood capacities,” “redefining the roles of citizens and urban management actors” at the neighborhood level, and understanding the concept and functions of “participatory planning” at the local level has emerged. This approach has contributed to the development and implementation of a new urban management model focused on neighborhood-level management [Azimi Amoli & Ershadi Vahram, 2017: 21]. Many researchers have explored various aspects of neighborhood-centered managerial roles in sustaining urban areas.
However, the key issue is that urban management in Iran lacks an institutional model for citizen-based urban planning [Razavi Alhashem & Musai, 2009: 164]. Furthermore, the centralized system in the country (top-down planning) has reduced citizen participation at the neighborhood level. In centralized planning, identification of facilities and resources at higher planning levels is based on information collected at lower levels [Masoumi Eshkevari, 2008: 19]. Therefore, urban planning and management have increasingly focused on lower levels and the tangible dimensions of urban life [Fridman, 2007], emphasizing local levels, civil society organizations, and citizen trust and participation in everyday activities [Hajipour, 2006: 39].
Zabol City, located in the north of Sistan and Baluchestan Province with a population of 134,950, has experienced significant physical expansion in recent years due to its strategic and political conditions, border closures, drought, rural migration, and other factors. Over the past decade, the city’s area increased from 2,084.52 hectares to 2,786.81 hectares. The incorporation of surrounding villages into the main urban fabric has led to horizontal urban growth, adding District 6 and several neighborhoods. Zabol currently consists of 6 districts and 26 neighborhoods [Master plan of Zabol city, 2019].
All these developments have posed significant challenges for urban management. By enhancing municipal capacity and citizen participation in neighborhood affairs, many of these issues can be mitigated. To reduce risks and create a comfortable urban environment for citizens, participation in urban programs is crucial. The main focus of this study was the role of neighborhood-centered management in the socio-economic sustainability of Zabol City. Conscious citizen participation increases program quality and efficiency and prevents substantial costs for organizations, including the municipality. Therefore, leveraging citizen participation potential in urban management can provide solutions to numerous challenges, as the socio-cultural background of the people of Sistan facilitates effective engagement. Neighborhood-based organization in Zabol enables empowerment and participation of residents, strengthening various dimensions of sustainable development (social and economic).
Methodology
This applied study employed a descriptive–analytical approach and was conducted in 2021–2022, focusing on the city of Zabol. In terms of purpose, the research was applied, and methodologically it adopted a survey design to examine the managerial role of neighborhood-oriented approaches in the socio-economic sustainability of Zabol.
Two statistical populations were considered in this study. (a) The first comprised households residing in Zabol as the survey population (165,634 households). The sample size was determined using Cochran’s formula, yielding 383 respondents. (b) The second population included urban managers and experts in Zabol; using purposive sampling, 20 individuals were selected as the expert sample. The required data were collected through a documentary–field method, including questionnaires and observation.
The primary data collection instrument was a questionnaire. The questionnaire items were developed based on relevant literature and adapted to the characteristics of the study area, and covered indicators of participatory management and socio-economic development. Indicators of participatory management included: citizen education aimed at harmonizing decision-making in neighborhood development planning in Zabol; strengthening non-governmental organizations and enhancing private and public sector participation; realization of bottom-up planning; distribution of planning responsibilities across different levels of management and decision-making; involving citizens in monitoring their own destinies; decentralization of urban management; establishing communication between citizens and urban plans; reducing the cost and time of project implementation; and enhancing the sense of belonging to the community, responsibility, and awareness of rights as active agents in development processes. Indicators of social and economic development included: Increasing literacy levels; return of relatives and acquaintances from other cities to Zabol; strengthening public participation; enhancing self-confidence regarding individual capabilities; increasing women’s participation within households; reinforcing social cohesion and collective interaction; expanding social and economic networks; increasing mobility and movement; improving social security; enhancing social capital; increasing personal security; strengthening social cohesion among citizens; improving and expanding social relations; raising levels of social awareness; diversification of income sources in the industrial sector; diversification of income sources in the service sector; achieving financial self-reliance in the city; establishment of production workshops (entrepreneurship); increasing employment opportunities for youth; expanding private sector investment in Zabol; promoting a culture of job creation; reducing unemployment; and increasing purchasing power.
The face validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by subject-matter experts. To assess reliability, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated, yielding values of 0.81 for the participatory management questionnaire, 0.78 for the economic development questionnaire, and 0.75 for the social development questionnaire. These results indicate acceptable reliability levels for all instruments.
The selection of the studied neighborhoods from among Zabol’s neighborhoods was based on their active participation in neighborhood affairs and development projects; relevant information was obtained from the municipality.
Data analysis was conducted in several stages using SPSS version 21. First, a one-sample t-test was applied to examine the effects of participatory management at the neighborhood level in Zabol across social and economic dimensions. Subsequently, multiple linear regression analysis was employed to investigate the relationship between participatory management and the social and economic development of urban neighborhoods in Zabol. Finally, the WASPAS model was used to rank Zabol’s urban neighborhoods based on their degree of responsiveness to participatory management in the social and economic dimensions.
WASPAS is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method that combines the Weighted Sum Model (WSM) and the Weighted Product Model (WPM) to select the optimal alternative. This technique was introduced by Zavadskas et al. in their study on multi-criteria assessment using the WASPAS technique for selecting an optimal indoor environment. The weighted product approach is considered a highly accurate technique, as its decision matrix is based on objective data and is suitable for decision-making in highly sensitive problems. Accordingly, in this study, emphasis is placed on prioritization using the WASPAS technique .
Findings
Based on the calculated mean values, participatory management in the city of Zabol was found to be in an unfavorable condition. The results of the multiple linear regression analysis indicated a statistically significant relationship between participatory management and the social and economic development of Zabol’s urban neighborhoods at a confidence level exceeding 0.99 (R²=0.76; p=0.0001). Overall, a significant and positive association was observed between participatory management and socio-economic development at the neighborhood level (p = 0.0001). In other words, improvements in participatory management were associated with more favorable conditions in Zabol’s neighborhoods in both the social (t=1.456) and economic (t=1.342) dimensions.
The ranking of Zabol’s urban neighborhoods based on their responsiveness to participatory management in the social and economic dimensions was conducted using the WASPAS multi-criteria decision-making model. The results showed that, in the economic dimension, Neighborhood 17, with a weight of 3.445, exhibited the highest level of responsiveness to participatory management, whereas Neighborhood 11, with a weight of 3.123, demonstrated the lowest level. Similarly, in the social dimension, Neighborhood 17 achieved the highest weight (3.65), while Neighborhood 11 recorded the lowest weight (3.156), indicating the least responsiveness to participatory management.
Discussion
The present study was conducted to examine the managerial role of neighborhood-oriented approaches in the socio-economic sustainability of the city of Zabol. The findings indicated that the state of participatory management at the neighborhood level in Zabol was unfavorable. This situation is the result of a two-sided process involving both citizens and urban management institutions, including the municipality.
From the citizens’ perspective, population growth in Zabol has gradually led to the erosion of the city’s indigenous and traditional social patterns, resulting in a multicultural, or even fragmented, urban fabric. In this context, intra-group social networks (primarily based on family and kinship ties) were considerably stronger than inter-group networks, a condition that has proven detrimental to participatory management at the neighborhood level. Furthermore, citizens’ lack of trust in the municipality, the absence of a participatory mindset, the prioritization of individual interests over collective interests, and the limited acceptance of public participation by the municipality and other urban organizations constituted major obstacles to the formation of participatory management in Zabol.
The second set of challenges related directly to the municipality itself. The managerial structure of Zabol was highly centralized and rigid, and it demonstrates resistance, albeit to varying degrees, to new transformations. This contributed to a form of weak accountability and responsibility toward citizens. As a result, a substantial portion of the city’s administrative body lacks sufficient awareness regarding citizen participation, empowerment, and self-efficacy. Consequently, some urban managers perceive public involvement in urban affairs as a threat to their managerial efficiency and therefore refrain from delegating urban management responsibilities to citizens. In other words, participation has not been institutionalized within urban organizations, including the Zabol municipality, and is often limited to a symbolic or promotional discourse. Moreover, participatory mechanisms between designers and implementers in urban projects such as urban regeneration initiatives are largely absent within existing legal and executive frameworks.
Another critical issue was the weak communication between citizens and urban projects. In recent years, numerous projects were implemented in Sistan and Baluchestan Province, particularly in Zabol; however, in many cases, effective communication between residents and implementing organizations was lacking. Citizen participation during the early stages of project formulation and implementation could foster trust and strengthen residents’ sense of belonging to their neighborhoods. In practice, however, the role of Zabol’s residents in the stages of problem identification and project formulation has been marginal, which represents a major deficiency in service descriptions and contributes to a reduced sense of neighborhood attachment.
Additionally, one of the key weaknesses of participatory management in Zabol’s neighborhoods was the limited awareness among both specialists and non-specialists of the benefits, necessity, and mechanisms of participation. Participation requires appropriate tools, methods, and training. Such training should target planners, designers, and the general public alike in order to establish effective two-way communication between experts and users. Raising awareness about the importance of participation, fostering adequate motivation, and clarifying the tangible impact individuals can have on shaping their neighborhood environments are essential steps in this process. Proper dissemination of information regarding existing plans and programs within neighborhoods can further facilitate effective implementation and enhance residents’ engagement.
The findings also demonstrated that unfavorable participatory management conditions hinder the achievement of social and economic development at the neighborhood level in Zabol. From a social perspective, citizen participation has historically been a well-known characteristic of the region; a notable example was the tradition of hashar (collective voluntary labor), which is considered unique even within the Middle East. Thus, the participatory capacity of Zabol’s citizens is well established. Nevertheless, the historical trajectory of urban management and neighborhood design in Zabol has largely neglected participatory urban governance, and many urban managers remain unfamiliar with this approach. This neglect has contributed to weakened social cohesion, reduced self-confidence in individual capabilities, declining social capital, weakened social relations, lower levels of women’s participation, and reduced social and economic networks.
From an economic perspective, many urban projects such as regeneration initiatives and passive defense schemes have failed to adequately consider the economic conditions of residents in Zabol’s neighborhoods. Field observations revealed that a large proportion of residents in informal and peripheral neighborhoods rely on daily wage labor, including construction work, painting, municipal day labor, and employment in foundry, machining, and other industrial workshops. Many of these workers are employed in surrounding cities, and a significant number experience seasonal or prolonged unemployment. Consequently, widespread dissatisfaction with economic and financial conditions was expressed by residents. Had a participatory approach been incorporated into these projects, it could have facilitated diversification of income sources in the service sector, increased employment opportunities for educated youth and job seekers, improved job security, and enhanced overall economic resilience for Zabol’s residents.
Finally, the neighborhood ranking based on responsiveness to participatory management in social and economic dimensions showed that Neighborhood 17 exhibited the highest level of influence from participatory management. Neighborhoods 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, and 25 demonstrated greater responsiveness compared to other urban neighborhoods. These neighborhoods are located in the central and historical core of Zabol, encompassing major streets such as Imam Khomeini, Ferdowsi, Farhang, and Nimruz, with the central bazaar and key intersections serving as focal points. As the historical nucleus of Zabol, this central area reflects the city’s identity, stages of growth, and socio-economic development, and functions as the primary concentration of commercial, administrative, cultural, and social interactions. Therefore, participatory management initiatives in these neighborhoods are likely to yield particularly positive socio-economic outcomes.
The findings of this study are consistent with those of Alaeddini and Pourmirghaffari (2018), who have reported a substantial gap between current conditions and the ideals of good urban governance and have emphasized that transforming neighborhood management into a participatory system requires deeper and more comprehensive measures. The results also align with Lia et al. (2020), who have highlighted the need for greater public awareness, willingness, and empowerment of residents in China’s urban heritage management, noting that participation levels remain low. Similarly, the findings correspond with those of Benetti and Carvalho (2021), who have identified persistent challenges in developing effective mechanisms for managing urban risks and transforming open spaces into democratic and sustainable public spaces in Brazilian favelas.
Based on the results, the following recommendations are proposed:
The history of urban management science dates back to the emergence of cities and the necessity to develop principles, regulations, and laws governing human life within biological, psychological, and social contexts [Salari Sadroi & Kiani, 2018: 38; Ziari et al., 2008: 213; Kurdi, 2006: 22]. Currently, the concept of urban management is discussed within systematic management theories, whose basic principles include proper operational practices, social responsiveness, and flexibility, all of which are equally applicable. Urban management should be capable of responding to and overcoming urban limitations and challenges in the best possible way [Ziari et al., 2008: 213].
To overcome the problems and issues of urbanization and urban planning, various theories have been proposed, among which the theory of sustainable urban development is notable. This theory emphasizes comprehensive development across multiple dimensions, including the three main dimensions: social, economic, and environmental, and revolves around the human-environment axis. It focuses on economic development with environmental considerations and social justice [Rezaei & Negin Naji, 2015: 70]. Sustainable development is also a process that expands people’s choices, enhances participatory democracy, and empowers citizens to have a voice in decisions that shape their lives [Saraei & Moayedfar, 2010: 49]. It creates opportunities for people to utilize and extend their full potential.
In recent decades, many organizations and institutions involved in urban management and planning worldwide have emphasized promoting a participatory approach to encourage bottom-up management and planning and empower neighborhoods for developmental actions [Hajipour, 2006: 37; Hosseinikhah et al., 2015: 131]. Decision-making and problem-solving in urban issues have increasingly relied on the participation of local communities to ensure citizens' welfare [Rezazadeh & Selseleh, 2002: 82]. In today’s urban society, neighborhoods are the fundamental urban elements and the interface between urban management and citizens for achieving sustainable urban development [Khakpour et al., 2019: 199].
Neighborhood development refers to a process by which the community’s potential assets are mobilized and utilized to improve the quality of life for its residents [Sanaee et al., 2021: 140; Sharpour, 2004: 289]. To achieve neighborhood-level sustainability, which is based on citizen participation in development programs, capacity-building is essential. Neighborhood-level capacity-building can be realized through the recognition of social capital and its influencing factors. Therefore, measuring social capital at the neighborhood level and understanding how it is reproduced to assist citizens in achieving sustainable development is necessary. Social capital can be considered one of the characteristics of local development, being a primary element of social development [Abbaszadeh, 2012].
Mobilization of groups, collective action, strengthening and developing the foundations of democracy within the community (neighborhood), fostering self-confidence at individual and local levels, increasing indigenous and local leadership, and creating conditions where social problems are solved by neighborhood members themselves are among the key aspects [Javadzadeh & Alavi, 2016: 84; Nikpour, 2016: 138]. It should be noted that the concept of the neighborhood in Islamic texts is mainly presented in the context of neighborly relations and associated rights, much of which relates to social capital emphasized in today’s world [Sanaee et al., 2021: 140].
Thus, the necessity of “utilizing neighborhood capacities,” “redefining the roles of citizens and urban management actors” at the neighborhood level, and understanding the concept and functions of “participatory planning” at the local level has emerged. This approach has contributed to the development and implementation of a new urban management model focused on neighborhood-level management [Azimi Amoli & Ershadi Vahram, 2017: 21]. Many researchers have explored various aspects of neighborhood-centered managerial roles in sustaining urban areas.
However, the key issue is that urban management in Iran lacks an institutional model for citizen-based urban planning [Razavi Alhashem & Musai, 2009: 164]. Furthermore, the centralized system in the country (top-down planning) has reduced citizen participation at the neighborhood level. In centralized planning, identification of facilities and resources at higher planning levels is based on information collected at lower levels [Masoumi Eshkevari, 2008: 19]. Therefore, urban planning and management have increasingly focused on lower levels and the tangible dimensions of urban life [Fridman, 2007], emphasizing local levels, civil society organizations, and citizen trust and participation in everyday activities [Hajipour, 2006: 39].
Zabol City, located in the north of Sistan and Baluchestan Province with a population of 134,950, has experienced significant physical expansion in recent years due to its strategic and political conditions, border closures, drought, rural migration, and other factors. Over the past decade, the city’s area increased from 2,084.52 hectares to 2,786.81 hectares. The incorporation of surrounding villages into the main urban fabric has led to horizontal urban growth, adding District 6 and several neighborhoods. Zabol currently consists of 6 districts and 26 neighborhoods [Master plan of Zabol city, 2019].
All these developments have posed significant challenges for urban management. By enhancing municipal capacity and citizen participation in neighborhood affairs, many of these issues can be mitigated. To reduce risks and create a comfortable urban environment for citizens, participation in urban programs is crucial. The main focus of this study was the role of neighborhood-centered management in the socio-economic sustainability of Zabol City. Conscious citizen participation increases program quality and efficiency and prevents substantial costs for organizations, including the municipality. Therefore, leveraging citizen participation potential in urban management can provide solutions to numerous challenges, as the socio-cultural background of the people of Sistan facilitates effective engagement. Neighborhood-based organization in Zabol enables empowerment and participation of residents, strengthening various dimensions of sustainable development (social and economic).
Methodology
This applied study employed a descriptive–analytical approach and was conducted in 2021–2022, focusing on the city of Zabol. In terms of purpose, the research was applied, and methodologically it adopted a survey design to examine the managerial role of neighborhood-oriented approaches in the socio-economic sustainability of Zabol.
Two statistical populations were considered in this study. (a) The first comprised households residing in Zabol as the survey population (165,634 households). The sample size was determined using Cochran’s formula, yielding 383 respondents. (b) The second population included urban managers and experts in Zabol; using purposive sampling, 20 individuals were selected as the expert sample. The required data were collected through a documentary–field method, including questionnaires and observation.
The primary data collection instrument was a questionnaire. The questionnaire items were developed based on relevant literature and adapted to the characteristics of the study area, and covered indicators of participatory management and socio-economic development. Indicators of participatory management included: citizen education aimed at harmonizing decision-making in neighborhood development planning in Zabol; strengthening non-governmental organizations and enhancing private and public sector participation; realization of bottom-up planning; distribution of planning responsibilities across different levels of management and decision-making; involving citizens in monitoring their own destinies; decentralization of urban management; establishing communication between citizens and urban plans; reducing the cost and time of project implementation; and enhancing the sense of belonging to the community, responsibility, and awareness of rights as active agents in development processes. Indicators of social and economic development included: Increasing literacy levels; return of relatives and acquaintances from other cities to Zabol; strengthening public participation; enhancing self-confidence regarding individual capabilities; increasing women’s participation within households; reinforcing social cohesion and collective interaction; expanding social and economic networks; increasing mobility and movement; improving social security; enhancing social capital; increasing personal security; strengthening social cohesion among citizens; improving and expanding social relations; raising levels of social awareness; diversification of income sources in the industrial sector; diversification of income sources in the service sector; achieving financial self-reliance in the city; establishment of production workshops (entrepreneurship); increasing employment opportunities for youth; expanding private sector investment in Zabol; promoting a culture of job creation; reducing unemployment; and increasing purchasing power.
The face validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by subject-matter experts. To assess reliability, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated, yielding values of 0.81 for the participatory management questionnaire, 0.78 for the economic development questionnaire, and 0.75 for the social development questionnaire. These results indicate acceptable reliability levels for all instruments.
The selection of the studied neighborhoods from among Zabol’s neighborhoods was based on their active participation in neighborhood affairs and development projects; relevant information was obtained from the municipality.
Data analysis was conducted in several stages using SPSS version 21. First, a one-sample t-test was applied to examine the effects of participatory management at the neighborhood level in Zabol across social and economic dimensions. Subsequently, multiple linear regression analysis was employed to investigate the relationship between participatory management and the social and economic development of urban neighborhoods in Zabol. Finally, the WASPAS model was used to rank Zabol’s urban neighborhoods based on their degree of responsiveness to participatory management in the social and economic dimensions.
WASPAS is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method that combines the Weighted Sum Model (WSM) and the Weighted Product Model (WPM) to select the optimal alternative. This technique was introduced by Zavadskas et al. in their study on multi-criteria assessment using the WASPAS technique for selecting an optimal indoor environment. The weighted product approach is considered a highly accurate technique, as its decision matrix is based on objective data and is suitable for decision-making in highly sensitive problems. Accordingly, in this study, emphasis is placed on prioritization using the WASPAS technique .
Findings
Based on the calculated mean values, participatory management in the city of Zabol was found to be in an unfavorable condition. The results of the multiple linear regression analysis indicated a statistically significant relationship between participatory management and the social and economic development of Zabol’s urban neighborhoods at a confidence level exceeding 0.99 (R²=0.76; p=0.0001). Overall, a significant and positive association was observed between participatory management and socio-economic development at the neighborhood level (p = 0.0001). In other words, improvements in participatory management were associated with more favorable conditions in Zabol’s neighborhoods in both the social (t=1.456) and economic (t=1.342) dimensions.
The ranking of Zabol’s urban neighborhoods based on their responsiveness to participatory management in the social and economic dimensions was conducted using the WASPAS multi-criteria decision-making model. The results showed that, in the economic dimension, Neighborhood 17, with a weight of 3.445, exhibited the highest level of responsiveness to participatory management, whereas Neighborhood 11, with a weight of 3.123, demonstrated the lowest level. Similarly, in the social dimension, Neighborhood 17 achieved the highest weight (3.65), while Neighborhood 11 recorded the lowest weight (3.156), indicating the least responsiveness to participatory management.
Discussion
The present study was conducted to examine the managerial role of neighborhood-oriented approaches in the socio-economic sustainability of the city of Zabol. The findings indicated that the state of participatory management at the neighborhood level in Zabol was unfavorable. This situation is the result of a two-sided process involving both citizens and urban management institutions, including the municipality.
From the citizens’ perspective, population growth in Zabol has gradually led to the erosion of the city’s indigenous and traditional social patterns, resulting in a multicultural, or even fragmented, urban fabric. In this context, intra-group social networks (primarily based on family and kinship ties) were considerably stronger than inter-group networks, a condition that has proven detrimental to participatory management at the neighborhood level. Furthermore, citizens’ lack of trust in the municipality, the absence of a participatory mindset, the prioritization of individual interests over collective interests, and the limited acceptance of public participation by the municipality and other urban organizations constituted major obstacles to the formation of participatory management in Zabol.
The second set of challenges related directly to the municipality itself. The managerial structure of Zabol was highly centralized and rigid, and it demonstrates resistance, albeit to varying degrees, to new transformations. This contributed to a form of weak accountability and responsibility toward citizens. As a result, a substantial portion of the city’s administrative body lacks sufficient awareness regarding citizen participation, empowerment, and self-efficacy. Consequently, some urban managers perceive public involvement in urban affairs as a threat to their managerial efficiency and therefore refrain from delegating urban management responsibilities to citizens. In other words, participation has not been institutionalized within urban organizations, including the Zabol municipality, and is often limited to a symbolic or promotional discourse. Moreover, participatory mechanisms between designers and implementers in urban projects such as urban regeneration initiatives are largely absent within existing legal and executive frameworks.
Another critical issue was the weak communication between citizens and urban projects. In recent years, numerous projects were implemented in Sistan and Baluchestan Province, particularly in Zabol; however, in many cases, effective communication between residents and implementing organizations was lacking. Citizen participation during the early stages of project formulation and implementation could foster trust and strengthen residents’ sense of belonging to their neighborhoods. In practice, however, the role of Zabol’s residents in the stages of problem identification and project formulation has been marginal, which represents a major deficiency in service descriptions and contributes to a reduced sense of neighborhood attachment.
Additionally, one of the key weaknesses of participatory management in Zabol’s neighborhoods was the limited awareness among both specialists and non-specialists of the benefits, necessity, and mechanisms of participation. Participation requires appropriate tools, methods, and training. Such training should target planners, designers, and the general public alike in order to establish effective two-way communication between experts and users. Raising awareness about the importance of participation, fostering adequate motivation, and clarifying the tangible impact individuals can have on shaping their neighborhood environments are essential steps in this process. Proper dissemination of information regarding existing plans and programs within neighborhoods can further facilitate effective implementation and enhance residents’ engagement.
The findings also demonstrated that unfavorable participatory management conditions hinder the achievement of social and economic development at the neighborhood level in Zabol. From a social perspective, citizen participation has historically been a well-known characteristic of the region; a notable example was the tradition of hashar (collective voluntary labor), which is considered unique even within the Middle East. Thus, the participatory capacity of Zabol’s citizens is well established. Nevertheless, the historical trajectory of urban management and neighborhood design in Zabol has largely neglected participatory urban governance, and many urban managers remain unfamiliar with this approach. This neglect has contributed to weakened social cohesion, reduced self-confidence in individual capabilities, declining social capital, weakened social relations, lower levels of women’s participation, and reduced social and economic networks.
From an economic perspective, many urban projects such as regeneration initiatives and passive defense schemes have failed to adequately consider the economic conditions of residents in Zabol’s neighborhoods. Field observations revealed that a large proportion of residents in informal and peripheral neighborhoods rely on daily wage labor, including construction work, painting, municipal day labor, and employment in foundry, machining, and other industrial workshops. Many of these workers are employed in surrounding cities, and a significant number experience seasonal or prolonged unemployment. Consequently, widespread dissatisfaction with economic and financial conditions was expressed by residents. Had a participatory approach been incorporated into these projects, it could have facilitated diversification of income sources in the service sector, increased employment opportunities for educated youth and job seekers, improved job security, and enhanced overall economic resilience for Zabol’s residents.
Finally, the neighborhood ranking based on responsiveness to participatory management in social and economic dimensions showed that Neighborhood 17 exhibited the highest level of influence from participatory management. Neighborhoods 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, and 25 demonstrated greater responsiveness compared to other urban neighborhoods. These neighborhoods are located in the central and historical core of Zabol, encompassing major streets such as Imam Khomeini, Ferdowsi, Farhang, and Nimruz, with the central bazaar and key intersections serving as focal points. As the historical nucleus of Zabol, this central area reflects the city’s identity, stages of growth, and socio-economic development, and functions as the primary concentration of commercial, administrative, cultural, and social interactions. Therefore, participatory management initiatives in these neighborhoods are likely to yield particularly positive socio-economic outcomes.
The findings of this study are consistent with those of Alaeddini and Pourmirghaffari (2018), who have reported a substantial gap between current conditions and the ideals of good urban governance and have emphasized that transforming neighborhood management into a participatory system requires deeper and more comprehensive measures. The results also align with Lia et al. (2020), who have highlighted the need for greater public awareness, willingness, and empowerment of residents in China’s urban heritage management, noting that participation levels remain low. Similarly, the findings correspond with those of Benetti and Carvalho (2021), who have identified persistent challenges in developing effective mechanisms for managing urban risks and transforming open spaces into democratic and sustainable public spaces in Brazilian favelas.
Based on the results, the following recommendations are proposed:
- Reforming and strengthening Zabol’s urban management system by redistributing planning responsibilities across different managerial levels and involving all stakeholders engaged in urban life to enhance participatory management at the neighborhood level. Decentralization and the transfer of planning and decision-making authority from urban organizations—particularly the municipality—to non-governmental and community-based organizations can significantly improve the management system. This approach enables closer alignment between planning objectives and the actual needs and capacities of neighborhoods and enhances coherence between planning and implementation processes.
- Establishing community-based organizations in the form of cooperatives that both encourage participation and provide tangible economic and service-related benefits to their members. Although such structures may initially face legal, regulatory, and technical challenges, revising existing laws and reforming municipal structures in favor of this model can facilitate neighborhood-based regeneration and provide appropriate living environments for contemporary urban residents.
- Redefining the role of the municipality and other urban organizations by maintaining their positions as planners, designers, and supervisors of urban services while delegating executive functions to participatory and community-based institutions. By withdrawing from direct implementation and transferring operational responsibilities to people-centered structures, urban institutions can focus on oversight, coordination, and strategic guidance, thereby strengthening participatory governance in Zabol.
Conclusion
The state of participatory management in the studied neighborhoods of Zabol is evaluated as unfavorable. The degree to which these neighborhoods are influenced by participatory management in the social and economic dimensions is very limited. Therefore, across all dimensions discussed, it is essential to address the challenges facing Zabol by strengthening capacity building in urban management and enhancing citizen participation in neighborhood affairs, with particular emphasis on participatory management approaches.
Acknowledgements: There is nothing to report.
Ethical Permission: There is nothing to report.
Conflict of interest: This article is derived from the first author’s doctoral dissertation, conducted under the supervision of the second author and with consultation from the third author at Islamic Azad University, Zahedan.
Author contributions: Davoodi SA (First Author), Principal Researcher/Discussion Writer (50%); Hafez Razazadeh M (Second Author), Methodologist (25%); Karimian Bostani M (Third Author), Methodologist (25%)
Funding: This research was conducted with the authors’ personal funding.
References
1. Abbaszadeh M, Alizadehaghdam M, Eslamibanab S (2012). A Studying the relations between social capital and social anomy. Quarterly of Social Studies and Research in Iran. 1(1):145-172. [Persian] [Link]
2. Alaeddini P, Pourmirghaffari M (2018). Tehran's neighborhood management and sub-councils: Assessing urban governance in Hassan-Abad-e Zargandeh. Quarterly of Social Studies and Research in Iran. 7(1):25-52. [Persian] [Link]
3. Azimi Amoli J, Ershadi Vahram S (2017). Urban management based on neighborhood participatory planning approach (Case study: Neighborhood urban areas of Tehran 1st district). Geography (Regional Planning). 7(2):21-40. [Persian] [Link]
4. Bazi K, Mirkatoli J, Zaidali H (2017). Assessment of the role and effect of local councils on the improvement of the citizen's cooperation for urban management of the local district case study: Gorgan city. Geography and Development Iranian Journal. 15(46):147-168. [Persian] [Link]
5. Benetti P, Carvalho S (2021). Chapter 10 - Risk and urban design in Brazilian favelas: Linking participation, collective spaces, and territorial management, enhancing disaster preparedness. From Humanitarian Architecture to Community Resilience. 6:189-205. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/B978-0-12-819078-4.00010-1]
6. Fridman J (2007). Toward a non-euclidian mode of planning. Apa Journal. 26(1):482-485. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/01944369308975902]
7. Hajipour Kh (2006). Mabna neighborhood planning, an effective approach in creating sustainable urban management. Journal of Fine Arts. 1(26):37-46. [Persian]. [Link]
8. Hosseini H, Ghodrati H, Mireh M, Zangeneh Y (2013). Urban sustainability based on citizens' participation (Case study - the city of Sabzevar). Geography and Environmental Sustainability. 3(1):41-66. [Persian] [Link]
9. Hosseinikhah H, Taqvaee M, Alizadeh Asl J (2015). The city development strategy with emphasis on improving urban neighborhoods (Case study: neighborhoodsof Akbar Abad, Yazd). Geographical Planning of Space. 5(15):129-148. [Persian] [Link]
10. Javadzadeh H, Alavi A (2016). Comparative survey on the role of social capital in community sustainability in the new and old contexts (case: The Narmak and Yosefabad communities). 7(24):83-104. [Persian] [Link]
11. Khajeh Shahkuhi A, Najafi Kani A, Babaeian T (2014). Evaluation the rate of citizens' participation in the outskirts of central cities of urban management. Case study: City Babol. Geographical Planning of Space. 4(12):1-19. [Persian] [Link]
12. Khakpour B, Amini M, Souri F, Khodadad M (2019). Investigating the level of residents' satisfaction with worn-out structures from urban management measures (Case study: Region 2, Tehran metropolis). Geography and Human Relations. 1(4):199-210. [Persian] [Link]
13. Kurdi A (2006). Principles and foundations of creativity in city management. Journal of Municipalities. 75:22-23. [Persian] [Link]
14. Lia J, Krishnamurthy S, Roders P, Wesemael P (2020). Informing or consulting? Exploring community participation within urban heritage management in China. Habitat International. 105:102268. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102268]
15. Maleki D, Zareei, D, Zadvalikhajeh S (2018). Assessing the desirable urban governance indexes with the neighborhood-based management approach (Case study: Hamadan city neighborhoods). Geography and Territorial Spatial Arrangement. 8(29):61-74. [Persian] [Link]
16. Masoumi Eshkevari H (2008). A practical guide to planning and futures studies. Tehran: Message Publications. [Persian] [Link]
17. Musa Kazemi SM, Almasi R (2019). The role of neighborhood buildings in achieving the objectives of urban management, case study, Tehran metropolitan area 7. Journal of Urban Management. 18(54):183-196. [Persian] [Link]
18. Nikpour A, Karimzadeh H, Vahedi H (2016). Evaluate the spatial distribution of social capital in urban neighborhoods (A case study: Babolsar city). Geographical Planning of Space. 5(18):137-148. [Persian] [Link]
19. Parker S (2003). Urban theory & urban experience. Encountering the City. London: Routledge. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9780203471784]
20. Pinnegar S (2012). Neighborhood planning. International Encyclopedia of Housing and Home. 78-84. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/B978-0-08-047163-1.00526-9]
21. Piran P, Rafiean M, Rezaei M, Dehghan H (2016). Identify factors affecting social institutions to manage better neighborhoods (Case study: Ferdosiyeh neighborhoods in city- the city Shahriyar). 7(25):1-22. [Persian] [Link]
22. Portaheri M, Fattahi A, Nemati R, Adineh Vand A. (2016). Explain the advantages of using the WASPAS combined decision-making model in locating tourism target villages (Case study of tourism target villages in Lorestan province). Planning and arranging space. 20(2):115-140. [Persian] [Link]
23. Razavi Alhashem B, Musai M (2010). Analysis (SWOT) of civil participation in the designing of the urban management planning patterns (Case study: Tehran capital). Social Sciences. 16(47):161-196. [Persian] [Link]
24. Rezaei MR, Negin Naji S (2015). A study of effective strategies in creating a sustainable neighborhood with a participatory approach (Case Study: rahnamaei neighborhood of Yasuj). Journal of Research and Urban Planning. 6(20):69-82. [Persian] [Link]
25. Rezazadeh R, Selseleh A (2010). A review of sustainable community development policies through an assetbased approach, with emphasis on social & physical capital. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning. 2(4):121-140. [Persian] [Link]
26. Salari Sadroi F, Kiani A (2018). Analysis of the pattern of iranian urban management (Structure, performance and strategy). Urban Management Studies. 9(32):35-52. [Persian] [Link]
27. Sanaee A, Habib F, Etesam I (2021). Investigating the role of social capital in increasing neighborhood sustainability (Case study: Hesarak neighborhood of Tehran). Human & Environment. 19(2):137-153. [Persian]. [Link]
28. Saraei M, Moayedfar S (2010). A study of the importance of the sustainability of development in arid regional cities with respect to environmental factors. Geography and Environmental Planning. 21(1):47-76. [Persian] [Link]
29. Sharpour M (2004). Strengthening human relations to attract people's participation. Abstract of Proceedings of the Neighborhood Development Conference, Tehran municipality. [Persian] [Link]
30. Zavadskas EK, Mardani A, Turskis Z, Jusoh A, Nor K (2016). Development of TOPSIS method to solve complicated decision-making problems: An overview on developments from 2000 to 2015. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making. 15(3):645-682. [Link] [DOI:10.1142/S0219622016300019]
31. Ziari K, Zandav S, Aghajani M, Moghdam M (2009). Investigating citizen participation and its role in urban management of small cities (Case studies: Galeh Dar, varzaneh and hidege). Journal of Geography and Regional Development. 7(13):211-235. [Persian] [Link]