Persian
Language
Geographical Research is Published in Persian Fulltext.
Volume 39, Issue 2 (2024)
GeoRes 2024, 39(2): 199-206 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2024/02/17 | Accepted: 2024/04/22 | Published: 2024/05/21
Received: 2024/02/17 | Accepted: 2024/04/22 | Published: 2024/05/21
How to cite this article
Mirzaei A, Zandmoghaddam M, Kamyabi S. Social and Economic Resilience of Ilam city against Natural Hazards. GeoRes 2024; 39 (2) :199-206
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1589-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1589-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- Geography and Urban Planning, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran
Full-Text (HTML) (5 Views)
Background
Given the increasing environmental hazards and natural disasters, urban resilience has emerged as a key concept for reducing the vulnerability of cities and enhancing the capacity of communities to cope with threats. This concept encompasses social, economic, institutional, and environmental dimensions, and its analysis plays an important role in formulating risk reduction policies. The present study examines the resilience of Ilam city in this context.
Previous Studies
Several studies have examined various dimensions of urban resilience. Meerow et al. (2016) have defined urban resilience as the ability of social-ecological systems to return to desired functions following disturbances. Tepes and Neumann (2020) and Rus et al. (2018) have emphasized the need for a comprehensive approach to resilience assessment considering the dependencies and capacities of urban ecosystems. Herreria et al. (2010) identified three main aspects of social resilience: resistance, recovery, and creativity. Caia et al. (2011), in a study on ecological resilience against floods, have highlighted the critical role of management. Feofilovs and Romagnoli (2021) develop a dynamic simulation tool for comparing urban resilience scenarios. Additionally, Liu et al. (2021) have analyzed multidimensional resilience indices for 39 Chinese cities using factor analysis. Saeidi Mofrad et al. (2021) report a relatively favorable ecological-infrastructural resilience status for the city of Fariman.
Aim(s)
This study was conducted with the aim of assessing the economic and social resilience of Ilam city against environmental hazards.
Research Type
The present research was applied in nature and based on survey data collection.
Research Society, Place and Time
This study was conducted in 2023 in Ilam city, the capital of Ilam province, located in western Iran. The research was carried out in two phases: the first phase involved urban planning officials as the study population, and the second phase included citizens from different urban districts of Ilam.
Sampling Method and Number
In this study, a volume-proportional cluster sampling method was used. First, the four urban districts of Ilam were selected as the main clusters, and then the main streets and squares of each district were considered as sampling blocks. The sample size was calculated using Cochran’s formula and determined to be 62 individuals. Questionnaires were distributed and completed among citizens proportionally to the population of each urban district.
Used Devices & Materials
The main data collection tool in this study was a researcher-developed questionnaire consisting of 24 items, designed based on economic and social resilience indicators and components. The items were structured using a five-point Likert scale. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 24 and a one-sample t-test. Additionally, the VIKOR multi-criteria decision-making method was used to rank the urban districts of Ilam in terms of resilience levels. The questionnaire’s validity was confirmed by experts, and its reliability was assessed with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.92.
Findings by Text
Among the responding planners, approximately 47% were men and 53% were women. About 43.3% held a bachelor’s degree, and 16.7% had a doctorate. The largest age group was 36 to 45 years old (40%) (Table 1).
The mean values for all economic and social urban resilience components were estimated above the average threshold of 3 (Table 2). However, the significance levels for both social and economic dimensions were greater than 0.05, indicating that the overall resilience desirability of Ilam city was evaluated as weak (Table 3).
In the VIKOR model evaluation, District 3 had the highest economic resilience, while District 4 had the highest social resilience (Table 4). Based on the Q values, District 3 and District 4 were recognized as the most resilient economically and socially, respectively. Additionally, 75% of the districts were moderately socially resilient, and 50% were moderately economically resilient. District 1 was reported as economically non-resilient, and District 2 had low social resilience.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents
Table 2. Results of urban resilience and sustainability components from the perspective of urban planners
Table 3. Analysis of the desirability of resilience components using one-sample t-Test in Ilam city
Table 4. Values of S, R, and Q in the implementation of the VIKOR model for the resilience of Ilam regions against natural hazards
Among social components, from the citizens’ perspective, “education” had the highest mean, and “social vulnerability” had the lowest (Table 5). From the planners’ perspective, the highest score belonged to “safety of household and public environment equipment,” while the lowest was “social justice and equality.” The component “level of participation in crisis management” had the highest importance in enhancing social resilience with an entropy weight of 0.264.
Table 5. Weights of social and economic subcomponents of resilience
In the economic dimension, the subcomponent “ability to compensate damages” held the greatest weight among components. Overall, Ilam’s social resilience was in a better condition compared to its economic resilience.
Main Comparisons to Similar Studies
This study assessed the economic and social resilience of Ilam city against environmental hazards, highlighting the need for forward-looking design approaches due to rapid population growth, climate change, and natural disasters. Similar to Rezaei (2013), economic resilience was strongly influenced by the ability of households to recover employment and income after crises, with Region 3 identified as the most economically resilient and Region 1 the least due to low incomes among rural migrants. Social resilience was generally stronger than economic, with Region 4 being the most socially resilient and Region 2 showing weakness. Echoing Abadollahzadeh Maleki et al. (2017) and Partovi et al. (2015), citizen participation emerges as a critical factor in social resilience, supported by an entropy weight of 0.264 for crisis participation. Education, with the highest citizen rating, was pivotal in enhancing awareness, mental stability, and crisis response skills, consistent with Cost’s (2015) findings on education's role in resilience. Effective social resilience requires strengthened community engagement and institutional cooperation to better manage hazards and disasters.
Suggestions
It is recommended that similar studies be conducted in other urban areas to provide planners with a comprehensive database covering all major cities in the country. Additionally, examining economic and social resilience against other types of hazards would significantly aid in risk reduction planning and preparedness for future challenges.
Conclusion
Half of the studied areas in Ilam city were found to be relatively economically resilient and showed better economic resilience overall. Among these areas, only District One lacked economic resilience due to a high population of rural migrants with insufficient income. Additionally, 75% of the districts were relatively socially resilient, with only District Two exhibiting low social resilience. Overall, the social resilience in Ilam city was generally better than its economic resilience.
Acknowledgments: We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those who assisted us in conducting this research.
Ethical Permission: None reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: This article is derived from the first author's dissertation, supervised by the second author and advised by the third author.
Authors’ Contributions: Mirzaei AM (First author), Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (40%); Zandmoghadam M (Second author), Discussion Writer/Statistical Analyst (30%); Kamyabi S (Third author), Methodologist/Introduction Writer (30%).
Funding: None reported by the authors.
Given the increasing environmental hazards and natural disasters, urban resilience has emerged as a key concept for reducing the vulnerability of cities and enhancing the capacity of communities to cope with threats. This concept encompasses social, economic, institutional, and environmental dimensions, and its analysis plays an important role in formulating risk reduction policies. The present study examines the resilience of Ilam city in this context.
Previous Studies
Several studies have examined various dimensions of urban resilience. Meerow et al. (2016) have defined urban resilience as the ability of social-ecological systems to return to desired functions following disturbances. Tepes and Neumann (2020) and Rus et al. (2018) have emphasized the need for a comprehensive approach to resilience assessment considering the dependencies and capacities of urban ecosystems. Herreria et al. (2010) identified three main aspects of social resilience: resistance, recovery, and creativity. Caia et al. (2011), in a study on ecological resilience against floods, have highlighted the critical role of management. Feofilovs and Romagnoli (2021) develop a dynamic simulation tool for comparing urban resilience scenarios. Additionally, Liu et al. (2021) have analyzed multidimensional resilience indices for 39 Chinese cities using factor analysis. Saeidi Mofrad et al. (2021) report a relatively favorable ecological-infrastructural resilience status for the city of Fariman.
Aim(s)
This study was conducted with the aim of assessing the economic and social resilience of Ilam city against environmental hazards.
Research Type
The present research was applied in nature and based on survey data collection.
Research Society, Place and Time
This study was conducted in 2023 in Ilam city, the capital of Ilam province, located in western Iran. The research was carried out in two phases: the first phase involved urban planning officials as the study population, and the second phase included citizens from different urban districts of Ilam.
Sampling Method and Number
In this study, a volume-proportional cluster sampling method was used. First, the four urban districts of Ilam were selected as the main clusters, and then the main streets and squares of each district were considered as sampling blocks. The sample size was calculated using Cochran’s formula and determined to be 62 individuals. Questionnaires were distributed and completed among citizens proportionally to the population of each urban district.
Used Devices & Materials
The main data collection tool in this study was a researcher-developed questionnaire consisting of 24 items, designed based on economic and social resilience indicators and components. The items were structured using a five-point Likert scale. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 24 and a one-sample t-test. Additionally, the VIKOR multi-criteria decision-making method was used to rank the urban districts of Ilam in terms of resilience levels. The questionnaire’s validity was confirmed by experts, and its reliability was assessed with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.92.
Findings by Text
Among the responding planners, approximately 47% were men and 53% were women. About 43.3% held a bachelor’s degree, and 16.7% had a doctorate. The largest age group was 36 to 45 years old (40%) (Table 1).
The mean values for all economic and social urban resilience components were estimated above the average threshold of 3 (Table 2). However, the significance levels for both social and economic dimensions were greater than 0.05, indicating that the overall resilience desirability of Ilam city was evaluated as weak (Table 3).
In the VIKOR model evaluation, District 3 had the highest economic resilience, while District 4 had the highest social resilience (Table 4). Based on the Q values, District 3 and District 4 were recognized as the most resilient economically and socially, respectively. Additionally, 75% of the districts were moderately socially resilient, and 50% were moderately economically resilient. District 1 was reported as economically non-resilient, and District 2 had low social resilience.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents
Table 2. Results of urban resilience and sustainability components from the perspective of urban planners
Table 3. Analysis of the desirability of resilience components using one-sample t-Test in Ilam city
Table 4. Values of S, R, and Q in the implementation of the VIKOR model for the resilience of Ilam regions against natural hazards
Among social components, from the citizens’ perspective, “education” had the highest mean, and “social vulnerability” had the lowest (Table 5). From the planners’ perspective, the highest score belonged to “safety of household and public environment equipment,” while the lowest was “social justice and equality.” The component “level of participation in crisis management” had the highest importance in enhancing social resilience with an entropy weight of 0.264.
Table 5. Weights of social and economic subcomponents of resilience
In the economic dimension, the subcomponent “ability to compensate damages” held the greatest weight among components. Overall, Ilam’s social resilience was in a better condition compared to its economic resilience.
Main Comparisons to Similar Studies
This study assessed the economic and social resilience of Ilam city against environmental hazards, highlighting the need for forward-looking design approaches due to rapid population growth, climate change, and natural disasters. Similar to Rezaei (2013), economic resilience was strongly influenced by the ability of households to recover employment and income after crises, with Region 3 identified as the most economically resilient and Region 1 the least due to low incomes among rural migrants. Social resilience was generally stronger than economic, with Region 4 being the most socially resilient and Region 2 showing weakness. Echoing Abadollahzadeh Maleki et al. (2017) and Partovi et al. (2015), citizen participation emerges as a critical factor in social resilience, supported by an entropy weight of 0.264 for crisis participation. Education, with the highest citizen rating, was pivotal in enhancing awareness, mental stability, and crisis response skills, consistent with Cost’s (2015) findings on education's role in resilience. Effective social resilience requires strengthened community engagement and institutional cooperation to better manage hazards and disasters.
Suggestions
It is recommended that similar studies be conducted in other urban areas to provide planners with a comprehensive database covering all major cities in the country. Additionally, examining economic and social resilience against other types of hazards would significantly aid in risk reduction planning and preparedness for future challenges.
Conclusion
Half of the studied areas in Ilam city were found to be relatively economically resilient and showed better economic resilience overall. Among these areas, only District One lacked economic resilience due to a high population of rural migrants with insufficient income. Additionally, 75% of the districts were relatively socially resilient, with only District Two exhibiting low social resilience. Overall, the social resilience in Ilam city was generally better than its economic resilience.
Acknowledgments: We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those who assisted us in conducting this research.
Ethical Permission: None reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: This article is derived from the first author's dissertation, supervised by the second author and advised by the third author.
Authors’ Contributions: Mirzaei AM (First author), Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (40%); Zandmoghadam M (Second author), Discussion Writer/Statistical Analyst (30%); Kamyabi S (Third author), Methodologist/Introduction Writer (30%).
Funding: None reported by the authors.
Keywords:
References
1. Abadollahzadeh Maleki Sh, Shali Amini V, Khanlou N, Ziyari K (2017). Assessment and evaluation of social resilience in coping with natural disasters Case study: Earthquake in historical districts of Ardebil. Urban Management. 16(3):263-279. [Persian] [Link]
2. Caia YP, Huang GH, Tana Q, Chen B (2011). Identification of optimal strategies for improving eco-resilience to floods in ecologically vulnerable regions of a wetland. Ecological Modeling. 222(2):360-369. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.12.012]
3. Cost DS (2015). The role of public education in governance for resilience in a rapidly changing Arctic. Ecology and Society. 20(3):29. [Link] [DOI:10.5751/ES-07757-200329]
4. Fani Z, Masoumi L (2016). An evaluation of the impact of lifestyle on urban resiliency (a comparative study of Gheytariyeh and northern Shokufeh neighborhoods in districts 1 and 19 of Tehran). Urban Studies. 6(19):61-84. [Persian] [Link]
5. Farzad Behtash MR, Keiezhad MA, Pirbabaie MT, Asgari A (2013). Evaluation and analysis of dimensions and components of Tabriz Metropolis Resiliency. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture and Urban Planning. 18(3):33-42. [Persian] [Link]
6. Feofilovs M, Romagnoli F (2021). Dynamic assessment of urban resilience to natural hazards. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 62:102328. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102328]
7. Godschalk D (2003). Urban hazard mitigation: Creating resilient cities. Natural Hazards Review. 4(3):136-143. [Link] [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2003)4:3(136)]
8. Herreria E, Byron I, Kancans R, Stenekes N (2010). Water 2010: Assessing dependence on water for agriculture and social resilience. National Assessment of Community Dependence on Water and Social Resilience. Canberra: Australian Government, Bureau of Rural Science. [Link]
9. Hosseinzadeh Dalir K, Mohamadian M, Sardari R (2019). An overview of the concept of urban resilience. Urban Design Studies and Urban Research. 2(3):69-78. [Persian] [Link]
10. Juan-Garcia P, Butler D, Comas J, Darch G, Sweetapple C, Thornton A, et al (2017). Resilience theory incorporated into urban wastewater systems management. State of the art. Water Research. 115:149-161. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.watres.2017.02.047]
11. Khaledi Sh, Ghahroudi M, Farahmand Gh (2021). Measuring and evaluating the resilience of urban areas against urban flooding (case study: Urmia City). Sustainable Development of Geographical Environment. 2(3):169-182. [Persian] [Link]
12. Liu X, Li S, Xu X, Luo J (2021). Integrated natural disasters urban resilience evaluation: The case of China. Natural Hazards. 107(3):2105-2122. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11069-020-04478-8]
13. Mavedat E, Garmsiri P, Momeni K (2020). Estimated distribution of urban resilience from the perspective of the earthquake crisis using the Spatial Stats Model (case study of Ilam). Journal of Regional Planning. 9(36):119-134. [Persian] [Link]
14. Meerow S, Newell JP, Stults M (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban Planning. 147:38-49. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011]
15. Partovi P, Behzadfar M, Shirani Z (2015). Urban design and social resiliency case study: Jolfa Neighborhood in Isfahan City. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning. 9(17):99-116. [Persian] [Link]
16. Rezaei MR (2013). Evaluating the economic and institutional resilience of urban communities to natural disasters using PROMETHE technique. Journal of Emergency Management. 2(1):27-38. [Persian] [Link]
17. Rus K, Kilar V, Koren D (2018). Resilience assessment of complex urban systems to natural disasters: A new literature review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 31:311-330. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.05.015]
18. Saeidi Mofrad S, Asiyaei M, Goharkhah F (2021). Assessment and evaluation of ecological and physical-infrastructure resilience of fariman city against natural hazards. Geographical and Territorial Spatial Arrengment. 11(40):195-212. [Persian] [Link]
19. Sharifi A, Chelleri L, Fox-Lent C, Grafakos S, Pathak M, Olazabal M, et al (2017). Conceptualizing dimensions and characteristics of urban resilience: Insights from a co-design process. Sustainability. 9(6):1032. [Link] [DOI:10.3390/su9061032]
20. Tepes A, Neumann MB (2020). Multiple perspectives of resilience: A holistic approach to resilience assessment using cognitive maps in practitioner engagement. Water Research. 178:115780. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.watres.2020.115780]
21. Tong P (2021). Characteristics, dimensions and methods of current assessment for urban resilience to climate-related disasters: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 60:102276. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102276]
22. Woolcock M (2001). The place of social capital in understanding social and economic outcomes. Candaian Journal of Policy Research. 2(1):11-17. [Link]