Bilingual
En/Fa
Geographical Research is Published in both Persian and English Full-text.
Volume 38, Issue 2 (2023)
GeoRes 2023, 38(2): 245-253 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2023/04/4 | Accepted: 2023/05/14 | Published: 2023/07/3
Received: 2023/04/4 | Accepted: 2023/05/14 | Published: 2023/07/3
How to cite this article
Gholami M, Saberi H, Toghyani S, Shams M. A Spatial analysis of right to the city indicators: A case study of Ahwaz metropolis. GeoRes 2023; 38 (2) :245-253
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1459-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1459-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, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
2- Tourism Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
3- Urban Planning Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
4- Geography Department, Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran
2- Tourism Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
3- Urban Planning Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
4- Geography Department, Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran
Full-Text (HTML) (48 Views)
Introduction
In recent years, as the efficiency of urban economic, political, cultural, and social structures has declined, urban crises accompanied by increasing citizen demands have become more evident, bringing the concept of the right to the city to the forefront. The right to the city provides an appropriate conceptual tool for critiquing the existing urban condition [Habibi & Amiri, 2016]. It is considered a human right, meaning that every individual, regardless of nationality, ethnicity, or cultural characteristics, is inherently entitled to enjoy this right simply by virtue of being human [Rahbari & Sharepour, 2013]. The concept was first introduced by Lefebvre in the 1960s. In the context of the right to the city, social–spatial transformations are necessary to enable urban residents to benefit from urban life and its associated opportunities [Maroufi & Vahidi Borji, 2015].
The right to the city is one of the essential components of future urban movements, which are activated when urban residents decide to rise and reclaim urban space [Purcell, 2014]. Radical theorists and key proponents of urban justice have embraced this concept as a framework for analyzing and challenging contemporary urbanism [Kuymulu, 2013]. It has become a powerful rallying cry in the struggle against the exclusionary processes of globalization and the commodification of urban space [Brown, 2013], representing a vision in which urban users collectively manage their own spaces [Purcell, 2014]. The right to the city identifies the city as the most crucial level for decision-making and policymaking [Zareshahabadi & Gholami, 2019] and is regarded as one of the most debated and thought-provoking concepts in urban studies [Taghvaee et al., 2016].
Over the past few decades, the concept of the right to the city has spread from Europe to other parts of the world; however, it has not yet received much attention in Iran [Meshkini et al., 2022]. Considering the existing inefficiencies in Iranian urban governance, attention to the right to the city is essential for addressing urban dysfunctions [Pourmohammadi et al., 2019]. Given Iran’s administrative structure, many citizens in major metropolitan areas remain unfamiliar with their urban rights, a problem that is particularly severe in Ahvaz. Based on the social structure of this metropolis, the citizens of Ahvaz have the right to a livable and efficient city that ensures the realization of their urban rights.
The concept of the right to the city emphasizes both citizens’ sense of belonging to the city and their participation in urban affairs [Rafieian & Alvandipour, 2016]. It goes beyond a fair division of the existing city or equal rights to it, the right to the city means creating a different city [Judi Gollor et al., 2016]. In essence, transforming the city requires transforming ourselves [Harvey, 2008]. Young argues that in recent years, reactions to neoliberal urbanism and social injustice have been framed by scholars and social movements through the concept of the right to the city [Aalbers & Gibb, 2014]. Increasingly, this concept has been used to challenge the privileges of neoliberal development [Balzarini & Shlay, 2016].
Originally associated with radical social movements, the right to the city has now been recognized by several governments and has inspired new public policy directions [Belda-Miquel et al., 2016]. The slogan has become the driving force behind a global protest challenging the dominant economic order, led by social activists, local campaigns, leading international organizations, and governments seeking fairer contracts between states and citizens [Brown, 2013].
The right to the city entails not only the right to access what currently exists but also the right to transform it [Harvey, 2003]. Both theoretically and practically, it represents a comprehensive and effective articulation of collective demands [Marcuse, 2009]. Its components include the right to habitat, facilitating networks of social relationships; the right to social cohesion and collective construction of the city; the right to live with dignity; the right to coexist and access urban governance; and the right to equality [Sugranyes & Mathivet, 2011]. For civic citizens, the right to the city encompasses two fundamental rights: the right to participation and the right to appropriation. According to the right to participation, citizens must play a key role in decision-making processes that shape urban space [Purcell, 2002].
For Lefebvre, the right to the city arises from the residency and participation of inhabitants in everyday urban life [Skrabut, 2021]. Through genuine and active participation, citizens become aware of their collective power and increasingly perceive themselves as capable stewards of the city and urban collective life [Purcell, 2014]. All city residents should have the right to participate in urban policy-making [Brown & Kristiansen, 2009]. This approach includes dimensions of participation such as involvement in decision-making, spatial production, and the design of urban forms and spaces [Khodayari Motlagh et al., 2017].
The criterion of appropriation includes the right to access, occupy, and use urban space, as well as to produce new spaces that meet people’s needs [Brown, 2013]. A sense of belonging to the city emerges through mobility, presence, tranquility, and the existence of spaces that people can identify as their own [Sharepour, 2015]. Factors influencing the degree of urban appropriation include levels of control and ownership, urban vitality, and the physical share of urban spaces [Khodayari Motlagh et al., 2017].
The widespread diffusion of the right to the city does not diminish its importance; on the contrary, it has become increasingly complex [Zamorano, 2021]. The right to the city should not be viewed as a nostalgic return to traditional cities but rather as the right to transform and reshape urban life [Lefebvre et al., 1996]. Ultimately, the goal of the right-to-the-city theory is an ongoing struggle to create urban spaces that feel less alien and more representative of the people who inhabit them [Aalbers & Gibb, 2014].
Ahvaz, the eighth largest metropolis in Iran, had a population of 1,184,788 in 2016 [Statistical Centre of Iran, 2016] and a gross population density of 63 persons per hectare. The city faces multiple physical, social, economic, and environmental challenges. Rapid population growth in recent decades has expanded the city’s physical boundaries, yet urban planners and managers have failed to provide adequate services that meet citizens’ expectations. The unequal access of different social groups (in terms of gender, age, etc.) to urban facilities, inequitable distribution of services among neighborhoods, and citizens’ limited influence in urban decision-making have collectively undermined the realization of the right to the city in Ahvaz. These inequalities vary across the city’s eight municipal districts. Therefore, this study aims to examine and analyze the indicators of the right to the city, namely security, communication, recreation, physical share, control and ownership, decision-making, spatial production, urban organization, social inclusion, justice, and urban transparency across different urban districts and to assess the overall level of realization of these indicators.
Methodology
This study is descriptive-analytical in terms of its objective and survey-based in terms of its nature. The research was conducted in the eight districts of the Ahvaz metropolis, during the year 2021. The statistical population consisted of all residents over 15 years of age living in the eight districts of Ahvaz. According to the 2016 census, their total number was 885,000 individuals. Among them, 375 participants were selected through a cluster-based simple random sampling method from the urban areas of Ahvaz.
To assess the ten indicators of the “Right to the City,” which were derived from the theoretical foundations and literature review, a researcher-made questionnaire comprising 43 items was developed using a five-point Likert scale. The validity of the questions was confirmed through face validity by experts, and the reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which was found to be 0.79 for the entire questionnaire.
Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics methods, including mean values, as well as inferential statistics through the one-sample t-test, utilizing SPSS software (version 21). In addition, spatial analysis of the eight districts of Ahvaz was performed using the Moran’s I model within a Geographic Information System (GIS) framework.
Findings
The analysis of demographic characteristics showed that 64.8% of respondents were male and 35.2% were female; 68.3% were married and 31.7% were single. In terms of age, 9.6% were between 15–20 years old, 24% between 20–30, 38.9% between 30–40, 21.6% between 40–50, 6.7% between 50–60, and 1.9% were over 60 years old. Regarding educational attainment, 29.3% held a high school diploma, 44.8% had an associate or bachelor’s degree, 13.6% a master’s degree or higher, 11.2% had less than a diploma, and 1.1% were illiterate. Concerning occupational status, 37.6% were employees, 31.7% self-employed, 19.2% unemployed, 7.2% students, and 4.3% seasonal workers.
To assess the extent of realizing the Right to the City in Ahvaz, ten indicators were examined: security, communication, recreation, physical share, control and ownership, decision-making, spatial production, urban organization, social inclusion, and urban justice and transparency. Descriptive analyses of these indicators and their mean values revealed that the overall Right to the City index was unsatisfactory both at the metropolitan scale and across the city’s districts.
A district-based analysis indicated that, with the exception of the justice and transparency index, District 2 had a comparatively better condition across most indicators.
To examine the degree of realization of the Right to the City from the citizens’ perspective and its difference from the hypothetical mean value of 3, a one-sample t-test was employed. The results indicated a statistically significant difference between the actual and expected means at both the metropolitan and district levels of Ahvaz. Consequently, it was concluded that, from the viewpoint of residents, the realization of the Right to the City was unsatisfactory.
Spatial Autocorrelation Analysis of the Right to the City Indicators
To determine the spatial distribution pattern of the studied indicators across Ahvaz, the Global and Local Moran’s I indices were used in ArcGIS 10.8 software. Ten individual indicators and one composite index were analyzed. The results of the Global Moran’s I test indicated that all parameters, except for the decision-making index, exhibited spatial autocorrelation with a clustered distribution pattern. The low p-values and high standardized z-scores further confirmed the clustering pattern in the data.
Based on the spatial autocorrelation test for the overall Right to the City index, the Moran’s I value was 0.089611, a positive number greater than zero (and close to one). This positive correlation and clustering pattern indicated that the spatial distribution of the Right to the City in Ahvaz was uneven.
Ranking of Right to the City Realization
To assess the relative status of the Right to the City across districts, the mean score of each district was calculated by combining all indicators. In all districts of Ahvaz, this mean value fell below the standard level. Districts 2 and 8, with mean values of 2.42 and 2.32, respectively, demonstrated better conditions than others, while Districts 6 and 1, with means of 2.03 and 2.06, were in the least favorable situation.
Additionally, the Local Moran’s I analysis was employed to visualize the clustering pattern of the indicators based on their z- and p-values. High and spatially close values with positive autocorrelation were labeled as High Clusters, while low and close values were labeled as Low Clusters. The High Clusters appeared in Districts 2, 3, and 8 and the Low Clusters were observed in Districts 6, 4, and 1.
Discussion
The present study aimed to examine and analyze the indicators of the Right to the City including security, communication, recreation, physical share, control and ownership, decision-making, spatial production, urban organization, social inclusion, and urban justice and transparency across the eight districts of Ahvaz, and to assess the overall level of realization of these indicators in the city. The evaluation and analysis revealed that the degree of realization of the Right to the City, both overall and across all its indicators, was below the standard and desirable level.
The findings of this research are consistent with those of Yaghfoori and Kashefi (2019), who report low citizen satisfaction regarding the realization of the Right to the City, and with Sharepour et al. (2015), who have found that citizens’ participation in urban design processes was limited. Similarly, Khezrnezhad et al. (2020), in their analysis of the Right to the City in urban public spaces, observed very low levels of citizen participation. Therefore, the challenge of unrealized Right to the City indicators is not unique to Ahvaz but is also evident in other Iranian cities.
The correlation and clustering indices demonstrated an unequal spatial distribution of citizens’ access to Right to the City indicators across Ahvaz. According to the spatial autocorrelation results, the Moran’s I value for the security index was 0.071607, a positive number close to one, indicating a clustered and unequal pattern of spatial distribution for security across the city. The clustering trend was confirmed for most indicators and the overall Right to the City index, implying that access to urban rights is not evenly distributed throughout Ahvaz. The inequality in access and realization of these indicators was also reflected in the mean scores obtained for each district.
This pattern of uneven realization of urban rights aligns with the findings of Dolatshah et al. (2021), who have analyzed livability indicators based on the Right to the City approach and confirmed disparities in the degree of realization of urban rights across city districts. In the current study, the mean values of each indicator varied according to the socio-spatial characteristics of each district. For example, the security index was lower in District 1 considered the commercial and central core of the city than in other areas, while informal residential neighborhoods exhibited lower security levels overall.
Similarly, the findings are consistent with those of Zareshahabadi and Gholami (2019), who have found that the sense of Right to the City among citizens in Yazd was below the average level, and with Rahbari and Sharepour (2013), who have reported that residents of Tehran perceived themselves as having a limited role in urban decision-making processes.
The results also correspond with the comparative study of Meshkini et al. (2022), which have shown that the condition of Right to the City indicators and criteria was unsatisfactory across all Iranian metropolises.
Overall, the findings of this study revealed that the realization of the Right to the City in Ahvaz is below average. Moreover, the spatial correlation and clustering patterns confirmed the unequal distribution of access to urban rights within the city. Therefore, urban planning efforts should prioritize the enhancement of Right to the City indicators, especially in disadvantaged neighborhoods.
The following recommendations are proposed to address the weaknesses identified in this study:
Conclusion
The status of all Right to the City indicators in the metropolis of Ahvaz is below the average and desirable level, and the distribution of access to these rights among citizens is uneven across the city.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Department of Geography and the Tourism Research Center of Islamic Azad University, Najafabad Branch, as well as to the Ahvaz Municipality, for their valuable cooperation in conducting this research.
Ethical Permission: No ethical issues were reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: No conflicts of interest were reported by the authors.
Authors’ Contributions: Gholami M (First Author): Introduction Writer/Methodologist/Main or Assistant Researcher/Statistical Analyst/Discussion Writer (40%); Saberi H (Second Author): Introduction Writer/Methodologist/Main or Assistant Researcher/Statistical Analyst/Discussion Writer (40%); Toghyani Sh (Third Author): Assistant Researcher (10%); Shams M (Fourth Author): Assistant Researcher (10%)
Funding: This research was self-funded by the authors.
In recent years, as the efficiency of urban economic, political, cultural, and social structures has declined, urban crises accompanied by increasing citizen demands have become more evident, bringing the concept of the right to the city to the forefront. The right to the city provides an appropriate conceptual tool for critiquing the existing urban condition [Habibi & Amiri, 2016]. It is considered a human right, meaning that every individual, regardless of nationality, ethnicity, or cultural characteristics, is inherently entitled to enjoy this right simply by virtue of being human [Rahbari & Sharepour, 2013]. The concept was first introduced by Lefebvre in the 1960s. In the context of the right to the city, social–spatial transformations are necessary to enable urban residents to benefit from urban life and its associated opportunities [Maroufi & Vahidi Borji, 2015].
The right to the city is one of the essential components of future urban movements, which are activated when urban residents decide to rise and reclaim urban space [Purcell, 2014]. Radical theorists and key proponents of urban justice have embraced this concept as a framework for analyzing and challenging contemporary urbanism [Kuymulu, 2013]. It has become a powerful rallying cry in the struggle against the exclusionary processes of globalization and the commodification of urban space [Brown, 2013], representing a vision in which urban users collectively manage their own spaces [Purcell, 2014]. The right to the city identifies the city as the most crucial level for decision-making and policymaking [Zareshahabadi & Gholami, 2019] and is regarded as one of the most debated and thought-provoking concepts in urban studies [Taghvaee et al., 2016].
Over the past few decades, the concept of the right to the city has spread from Europe to other parts of the world; however, it has not yet received much attention in Iran [Meshkini et al., 2022]. Considering the existing inefficiencies in Iranian urban governance, attention to the right to the city is essential for addressing urban dysfunctions [Pourmohammadi et al., 2019]. Given Iran’s administrative structure, many citizens in major metropolitan areas remain unfamiliar with their urban rights, a problem that is particularly severe in Ahvaz. Based on the social structure of this metropolis, the citizens of Ahvaz have the right to a livable and efficient city that ensures the realization of their urban rights.
The concept of the right to the city emphasizes both citizens’ sense of belonging to the city and their participation in urban affairs [Rafieian & Alvandipour, 2016]. It goes beyond a fair division of the existing city or equal rights to it, the right to the city means creating a different city [Judi Gollor et al., 2016]. In essence, transforming the city requires transforming ourselves [Harvey, 2008]. Young argues that in recent years, reactions to neoliberal urbanism and social injustice have been framed by scholars and social movements through the concept of the right to the city [Aalbers & Gibb, 2014]. Increasingly, this concept has been used to challenge the privileges of neoliberal development [Balzarini & Shlay, 2016].
Originally associated with radical social movements, the right to the city has now been recognized by several governments and has inspired new public policy directions [Belda-Miquel et al., 2016]. The slogan has become the driving force behind a global protest challenging the dominant economic order, led by social activists, local campaigns, leading international organizations, and governments seeking fairer contracts between states and citizens [Brown, 2013].
The right to the city entails not only the right to access what currently exists but also the right to transform it [Harvey, 2003]. Both theoretically and practically, it represents a comprehensive and effective articulation of collective demands [Marcuse, 2009]. Its components include the right to habitat, facilitating networks of social relationships; the right to social cohesion and collective construction of the city; the right to live with dignity; the right to coexist and access urban governance; and the right to equality [Sugranyes & Mathivet, 2011]. For civic citizens, the right to the city encompasses two fundamental rights: the right to participation and the right to appropriation. According to the right to participation, citizens must play a key role in decision-making processes that shape urban space [Purcell, 2002].
For Lefebvre, the right to the city arises from the residency and participation of inhabitants in everyday urban life [Skrabut, 2021]. Through genuine and active participation, citizens become aware of their collective power and increasingly perceive themselves as capable stewards of the city and urban collective life [Purcell, 2014]. All city residents should have the right to participate in urban policy-making [Brown & Kristiansen, 2009]. This approach includes dimensions of participation such as involvement in decision-making, spatial production, and the design of urban forms and spaces [Khodayari Motlagh et al., 2017].
The criterion of appropriation includes the right to access, occupy, and use urban space, as well as to produce new spaces that meet people’s needs [Brown, 2013]. A sense of belonging to the city emerges through mobility, presence, tranquility, and the existence of spaces that people can identify as their own [Sharepour, 2015]. Factors influencing the degree of urban appropriation include levels of control and ownership, urban vitality, and the physical share of urban spaces [Khodayari Motlagh et al., 2017].
The widespread diffusion of the right to the city does not diminish its importance; on the contrary, it has become increasingly complex [Zamorano, 2021]. The right to the city should not be viewed as a nostalgic return to traditional cities but rather as the right to transform and reshape urban life [Lefebvre et al., 1996]. Ultimately, the goal of the right-to-the-city theory is an ongoing struggle to create urban spaces that feel less alien and more representative of the people who inhabit them [Aalbers & Gibb, 2014].
Ahvaz, the eighth largest metropolis in Iran, had a population of 1,184,788 in 2016 [Statistical Centre of Iran, 2016] and a gross population density of 63 persons per hectare. The city faces multiple physical, social, economic, and environmental challenges. Rapid population growth in recent decades has expanded the city’s physical boundaries, yet urban planners and managers have failed to provide adequate services that meet citizens’ expectations. The unequal access of different social groups (in terms of gender, age, etc.) to urban facilities, inequitable distribution of services among neighborhoods, and citizens’ limited influence in urban decision-making have collectively undermined the realization of the right to the city in Ahvaz. These inequalities vary across the city’s eight municipal districts. Therefore, this study aims to examine and analyze the indicators of the right to the city, namely security, communication, recreation, physical share, control and ownership, decision-making, spatial production, urban organization, social inclusion, justice, and urban transparency across different urban districts and to assess the overall level of realization of these indicators.
Methodology
This study is descriptive-analytical in terms of its objective and survey-based in terms of its nature. The research was conducted in the eight districts of the Ahvaz metropolis, during the year 2021. The statistical population consisted of all residents over 15 years of age living in the eight districts of Ahvaz. According to the 2016 census, their total number was 885,000 individuals. Among them, 375 participants were selected through a cluster-based simple random sampling method from the urban areas of Ahvaz.
To assess the ten indicators of the “Right to the City,” which were derived from the theoretical foundations and literature review, a researcher-made questionnaire comprising 43 items was developed using a five-point Likert scale. The validity of the questions was confirmed through face validity by experts, and the reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which was found to be 0.79 for the entire questionnaire.
Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics methods, including mean values, as well as inferential statistics through the one-sample t-test, utilizing SPSS software (version 21). In addition, spatial analysis of the eight districts of Ahvaz was performed using the Moran’s I model within a Geographic Information System (GIS) framework.
Findings
The analysis of demographic characteristics showed that 64.8% of respondents were male and 35.2% were female; 68.3% were married and 31.7% were single. In terms of age, 9.6% were between 15–20 years old, 24% between 20–30, 38.9% between 30–40, 21.6% between 40–50, 6.7% between 50–60, and 1.9% were over 60 years old. Regarding educational attainment, 29.3% held a high school diploma, 44.8% had an associate or bachelor’s degree, 13.6% a master’s degree or higher, 11.2% had less than a diploma, and 1.1% were illiterate. Concerning occupational status, 37.6% were employees, 31.7% self-employed, 19.2% unemployed, 7.2% students, and 4.3% seasonal workers.
To assess the extent of realizing the Right to the City in Ahvaz, ten indicators were examined: security, communication, recreation, physical share, control and ownership, decision-making, spatial production, urban organization, social inclusion, and urban justice and transparency. Descriptive analyses of these indicators and their mean values revealed that the overall Right to the City index was unsatisfactory both at the metropolitan scale and across the city’s districts.
A district-based analysis indicated that, with the exception of the justice and transparency index, District 2 had a comparatively better condition across most indicators.
To examine the degree of realization of the Right to the City from the citizens’ perspective and its difference from the hypothetical mean value of 3, a one-sample t-test was employed. The results indicated a statistically significant difference between the actual and expected means at both the metropolitan and district levels of Ahvaz. Consequently, it was concluded that, from the viewpoint of residents, the realization of the Right to the City was unsatisfactory.
Spatial Autocorrelation Analysis of the Right to the City Indicators
To determine the spatial distribution pattern of the studied indicators across Ahvaz, the Global and Local Moran’s I indices were used in ArcGIS 10.8 software. Ten individual indicators and one composite index were analyzed. The results of the Global Moran’s I test indicated that all parameters, except for the decision-making index, exhibited spatial autocorrelation with a clustered distribution pattern. The low p-values and high standardized z-scores further confirmed the clustering pattern in the data.
Based on the spatial autocorrelation test for the overall Right to the City index, the Moran’s I value was 0.089611, a positive number greater than zero (and close to one). This positive correlation and clustering pattern indicated that the spatial distribution of the Right to the City in Ahvaz was uneven.
Ranking of Right to the City Realization
To assess the relative status of the Right to the City across districts, the mean score of each district was calculated by combining all indicators. In all districts of Ahvaz, this mean value fell below the standard level. Districts 2 and 8, with mean values of 2.42 and 2.32, respectively, demonstrated better conditions than others, while Districts 6 and 1, with means of 2.03 and 2.06, were in the least favorable situation.
Additionally, the Local Moran’s I analysis was employed to visualize the clustering pattern of the indicators based on their z- and p-values. High and spatially close values with positive autocorrelation were labeled as High Clusters, while low and close values were labeled as Low Clusters. The High Clusters appeared in Districts 2, 3, and 8 and the Low Clusters were observed in Districts 6, 4, and 1.
Discussion
The present study aimed to examine and analyze the indicators of the Right to the City including security, communication, recreation, physical share, control and ownership, decision-making, spatial production, urban organization, social inclusion, and urban justice and transparency across the eight districts of Ahvaz, and to assess the overall level of realization of these indicators in the city. The evaluation and analysis revealed that the degree of realization of the Right to the City, both overall and across all its indicators, was below the standard and desirable level.
The findings of this research are consistent with those of Yaghfoori and Kashefi (2019), who report low citizen satisfaction regarding the realization of the Right to the City, and with Sharepour et al. (2015), who have found that citizens’ participation in urban design processes was limited. Similarly, Khezrnezhad et al. (2020), in their analysis of the Right to the City in urban public spaces, observed very low levels of citizen participation. Therefore, the challenge of unrealized Right to the City indicators is not unique to Ahvaz but is also evident in other Iranian cities.
The correlation and clustering indices demonstrated an unequal spatial distribution of citizens’ access to Right to the City indicators across Ahvaz. According to the spatial autocorrelation results, the Moran’s I value for the security index was 0.071607, a positive number close to one, indicating a clustered and unequal pattern of spatial distribution for security across the city. The clustering trend was confirmed for most indicators and the overall Right to the City index, implying that access to urban rights is not evenly distributed throughout Ahvaz. The inequality in access and realization of these indicators was also reflected in the mean scores obtained for each district.
This pattern of uneven realization of urban rights aligns with the findings of Dolatshah et al. (2021), who have analyzed livability indicators based on the Right to the City approach and confirmed disparities in the degree of realization of urban rights across city districts. In the current study, the mean values of each indicator varied according to the socio-spatial characteristics of each district. For example, the security index was lower in District 1 considered the commercial and central core of the city than in other areas, while informal residential neighborhoods exhibited lower security levels overall.
Similarly, the findings are consistent with those of Zareshahabadi and Gholami (2019), who have found that the sense of Right to the City among citizens in Yazd was below the average level, and with Rahbari and Sharepour (2013), who have reported that residents of Tehran perceived themselves as having a limited role in urban decision-making processes.
The results also correspond with the comparative study of Meshkini et al. (2022), which have shown that the condition of Right to the City indicators and criteria was unsatisfactory across all Iranian metropolises.
Overall, the findings of this study revealed that the realization of the Right to the City in Ahvaz is below average. Moreover, the spatial correlation and clustering patterns confirmed the unequal distribution of access to urban rights within the city. Therefore, urban planning efforts should prioritize the enhancement of Right to the City indicators, especially in disadvantaged neighborhoods.
The following recommendations are proposed to address the weaknesses identified in this study:
- Planning to strengthen citizen participation in urban governance and decision-making.
- Implementing equitable service delivery to all social groups, emphasizing distributive justice.
- Utilizing local capacities and community-based potentials to increase inclusive and accessible public spaces.
- Adapting entertainment, recreational, and sports facilities to suit the age structure and needs of Ahvaz residents.
- Expanding recreational and leisure amenities to enhance the quality of life across the city.
Conclusion
The status of all Right to the City indicators in the metropolis of Ahvaz is below the average and desirable level, and the distribution of access to these rights among citizens is uneven across the city.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Department of Geography and the Tourism Research Center of Islamic Azad University, Najafabad Branch, as well as to the Ahvaz Municipality, for their valuable cooperation in conducting this research.
Ethical Permission: No ethical issues were reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: No conflicts of interest were reported by the authors.
Authors’ Contributions: Gholami M (First Author): Introduction Writer/Methodologist/Main or Assistant Researcher/Statistical Analyst/Discussion Writer (40%); Saberi H (Second Author): Introduction Writer/Methodologist/Main or Assistant Researcher/Statistical Analyst/Discussion Writer (40%); Toghyani Sh (Third Author): Assistant Researcher (10%); Shams M (Fourth Author): Assistant Researcher (10%)
Funding: This research was self-funded by the authors.
References
1. Aalbers MB, Gibb K (2014). Housing and the right to the city: Introduction to the special issue. International Journal of Housing Policy. 14(3):207-213. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/14616718.2014.936179]
2. Balzarini JE, Shlay AB (2016). Gentrification and the right to the city: Community conflict and casinos. Journal of Urban Affairs. 38:503-517. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/juaf.12226]
3. Belda-Miquel S, Peris Blanes J, Frediani A (2016). Institutionalization and depoliticization of the right to the city: Changing scenarios for radical social movements. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 40:321-339. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.12382]
4. Brown A (2013). The right to the city: Road to Rio 2010. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 37:957-971. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.12051]
5. Brown A, Kristiansen A (2009). Urban policies and the right to the city: Rights, responsibilities and citizenship (meeting document). Paris: UNESCO. [Link]
6. Dolatshah S, Sarvar R, Tavaklan A (2021). An analysis of viability indicators with human right to the city approach, case study: Mahshahr port. Quarterly of New Attitudes in Human Geography. 13(3):109-131. [Persian] [Link]
7. Habibi M, Amiri M (2016). Right to the city from current to ideal city. Iranian Journal of Anthropological Research. 5(2):9-30. [Persian] [Link]
8. Harvey D (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review. 53:Unknown pages. [Link]
9. Harvey D (2003). The right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 27:939-941. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/j.0309-1317.2003.00492.x]
10. Judi Gollor P, Zamanian R, Fathi H (2016). Tracking the notin of justie in city and urbanizatin theories: Critial urban theory and the theory of the right to the city. Journal of the Urban Development and Organization Haftshahr. 4(49, 50):100-113. [Persian] [Link]
11. Khodayari Motlagh S, Sharepour M, Tavallai N (2017). A study about the effect of desirability of urban space indicators on the realization of the right to city (case study: Babolsar). Biquarterly Journal of Sociology of Social Institutions. 4(9):189-225. [Persian] [Link]
12. Lefebvre H, Kofman E, Lebas E, editors (1996). Writings on cities. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. [Link]
13. Khezrnezhad P, Pourmohammadi MR, Roostaei S (2020). Analysis of the right to the city in urban public spaces with emphasis on gender equity approach, case study: Urmia City. Quarterly Journal of Woman and Society. 10(40):195-222. [Persian] [Link]
14. Kuymulu MB (2013). The vortex of rights: Right to the city' at a crossroads. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 37(3):923-940. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.12008]
15. Meshkini A, Zarghamfard M, Kahaki F (2022). A comparative study of the right to the city in Iran. GeoJournal. 87:3101-3118. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s10708-021-10421-6]
16. Marcuse P (2009). From critical urban theory to the right to the city. City. 13(2-3):185-197. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13604810902982177 [Link] [DOI:10.1080/13604810902982177]
17. Sugranyes A, Mathivet C, editors (2011). Cities for all: Proposals and experiences towards the right to the city. Chile: Habitat International Coalition (HIC). [Link]
18. Maroufi H, Vahidi Borji G (2015). Space and the realization of the right to the city: Identifying the spatial components of the right to the city for analyzing and evaluating the Navvab Project in Tehran and La Défense in Paris. Motaleate Shahri. 4(16):5-14. [Persian] [Link]
19. Pourmohammadi MR, Roostaei S, Khezrnezhad P (2019). Impact of the right to city on sense of belonging among gender groups (case study: Urmia public spaces). Geographical Urban Planning Research. 7(1):1-19. [Persian] [Link]
20. Purcell M (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant. GeoJournal. 58:99-108. [Link] [DOI:10.1023/B:GEJO.0000010829.62237.8f]
21. Purcell M (2014). Possible worlds: Henri Lefebvre and the right to the city. Journal of Urban Affairs. 36(1):141-154. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/juaf.12034]
22. Rahbari L, Sharepour M (2013). Ciender and right to the city: A test of Lefebvre's theory. Iranian Sociological Association. 15(1):116-141. [Persian] [Link]
23. Rafieian M, Alvandipour N (2016). Paying the concept thought of right to town; seek a conceptual model. Iranian Journal of Sociology. 16(2):25-47. [Persian] [Link]
24. Sharepour M, Rafatjah M, Rahbari L (2015). Citizens position in Arnestein's Ladder: Gender analysis of participatory dimentsion of right to the city. Social Welfare Quarterly. 15(57):177-203. [Persian] [Link]
25. Sharepour M (2015). Right to the city and urban public spaces. People and Culture. 1(2):51-66. [Persian] [Link]
26. Statistical Centre of Iran (2016). Selected findings of the 2016 national population and housing census. Tehran: Statistical Center of Iran publishing. [Persian] [Link]
27. Skrabut K (2021). Use, exchange, and speculation: The politics of inhabitance and the right to the city in urban Peru. City & Society. 33(1):118-146. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/ciso.12392]
28. Taghvaee AA, Azizi D, Yazdanian A (2016). Investigate the role of "the right to the city" theoty in the productin and reproductin of urban space. Journal of the Urban Development and Organization Haftshahr. 4(49, 50):88-99. [Persian] [Link]
29. Yaghfoori H, Kashefi D (2019). Evaluation of the components derived from the right to the city (case study: Piranshahr city). 9(35):57-68. [Persian] [Link]
30. Zamorano C (2021). Appropriating the concept of the right to the city: Politics, politicians, and collective actors in Mexico City. City & Society. 33(1):71-90. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/ciso.12394]
31. Zareshahabadi A, Gholami M (2019). Relationship between the right to city and legalism (case of study: Citizens 18 years of age and above of the city of Yazd). Urban Sociological Studies. 9(32):33-56. [Persian] [Link]