اولویت بندی سیاست‌های مشارکتی در بازآفرینی شهری با تأکید بر احتمال وقوع ناسازگاری میان بهره وران؛ مطالعه موردی: برنامه بازآفرینی بافت قدیم آمل

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دبیر انجمن برنامه ریزان شهری قائم شهر

2 استادیار گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه مازندران

چکیده

یکی از دلایل اصلی شکست برنامه‌های بازآفرینی شهری، ناسازگاری‌هایی است که بر سر منافع، میان بهره‌وران کلیدی مختلف در راستای اجرای سیاست‌های مشارکت محور آن رخ می‌دهد.از پیامدهای این وقوع ناسازگاری می‌تواند به تأخیر افتادن جدول زمان‌بندی اجرا، افزایش هزینه‌ها و کاهش کارایی و مطلوبیت باشد که در نتیجه برنامه از دستیابی به اهداف خود باز خواهد ماند. برنامه بازآفرینی بافت قدیم آمل نیز از این امر مستثنی نبوده و سیاست‌های آن به علت دارا بودن ماهیت مشاجره‌ای از خطر شکست برخوردارند.در همین راستا مقاله حاضر بر آن است تا با به کارگیری روش تجزیه و تحلیل حالات شکست و اثرات آن(FMEA) و ترکیب آن با روش رتبه‌بندی VIKOR تحت محیط فازی، در قالب یک فرآیند پیشنهادی به ارزیابی و رتبه‌بندی پنج سیاست مشارکتی از برنامه یاد شده بر اساس میزان ریسک وقوع ناسازگاری و شکست آنها بپردازد. روش تحقیق مقاله مبتنی بر تحلیل و ارزیابی بوده و روش‌شناسی آن از نقطه نظر مدیریت پروژه به ویژه در زمینه ناسازگاری با عنوان روش مدیریت ریسک مطرح است. روش نمونه‌گیری نیز به روش هدفمند و غیرتصادفی می‌باشد. یافته‌های مقاله در برنامه بازآفرینی شهر آمل نشان می‌دهد که سیاست سوم یعنی اقدام به تملک اراضی مجاور خیابان 30 متری (طبرسی) به دلیل دارا بودن پیچیدگی‌ها و کشمکش‌ها در زمینه‌های مالی، قانونی و اجتماعی_فرهنگی با بیشترین ریسک ناسازگاری میان بهره‌وران مواجه بوده و نیازمند بازنگری و در نظر گرفتن تمهیدات ویژه به هنگام اجراست.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Prioritizing participatory policies in urban regeneration with emphasis on the probability of conflict among key stakeholders (case study: Old part of Amol urban regeneration plan)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sajjad Fallah Zadeh 1
  • Farzin Mahmoudi Pati 2
چکیده [English]

An urban regeneration project is defined as a series of actions determined to accomplish urban regeneration aims that lead to a reduction of the problems of an area through the improvement of socio-economic, physical and environmental conditions (Roberts & Sykes, 2000; Yu & Lee, 2012). "Today, urban regeneration is one of key principles in act of planning and it is beyond the urban renewal, urban redevelopment or urban rehabilitation processes because of its longer-term and strategic approaches and its socioeconomic goals beside physical ones"  (Tarkay, 2010; 22). In the context of participating actors and stakeholders, the transition of urban regeneration policies has shown that from the 1950s to the beginning of the 21st century, in each decade, the policies had a tendency  toward cross-sector partnerships amongst private sector, public sector and community. From 1990s until the present participatory approach has dominated, local authorities have been empowered and coalition amongst the main actors and stakeholders has been enhanced (Roberts & Sykes, 2000; Tsenkova, 2002; McDonald et al, 2009). In fact, participation, strategic planning and sustainability form a triangle and provide a basis for actions in urban regeneration. In other words, participation (public, inter-organizational and participation among organizations, people and other stakeholders), strategic planning (combating urban decline, problem solving and involvement of all stakeholders) and taking into consideration sustainability goals (socio-economic, environmental and sustainability of acts in planning) are the main elements in urban regeneration (Nourian and Ariana, 2013). The essence of urban regeneration projects is very different from other urban development projects due to their complexity, in particular from the perspective of uncertainties because there are various actors and stakeholders such as local government, private developers, public organization and local communities who are involved in planning of these projects. For example, it is possible when one policy needing actors' participation is running, then several conflicts can occur amongst stakeholders due to the complexity of relationships. The results of these conflicts will increase costs, lowering efficiency and delaying implementation schedule (Carley, 2000; Yu & Lee, 2012). One of the complexities of participatory urban regeneration projects is to bring the key actors and stakeholders together to participate. This will need cooperation between local government, public organizations, private developers and local residents (Carley, 2000; Ball and Maginn, 2005). Therefore, one of the main reasons for the failure of urban regeneration projects is the occurrence of conflicts of interest amongst various key stakeholders in order to implement its participatory-oriented policies of the project. To this end, the present research seeks to assess participatory policies of an urban regeneration project and then prioritizing them based on the rate of possible conflicts-risk among stakeholders via offering a method of risk assessment. This method is a combination of FMEA and VIKOR methods in fuzzy environment with a proposed process. Applying this synthesis method to assess five participatory policies has shown that, based on the Q index, the low conflict-risk policies are desirable and they can be prioritized for implementation. Additionally, based on the Q index, the high conflict-risk policies are undesirable and they need to be corrected. Consequently, the combined method has been shown that the projects or the policies facing less risk can be prioritized for implementation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Risk Assessment
  • Participatory policies
  • conflict
  • Urban regeneration
  • FMEA method

Agard, B., & Barajas, M. (2010) The use of fuzzy logic in product family development: literature review and opportunities, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 23(5), 1445–1462.

  • Aminzadeh, B & Rezabeighi Sani R. (2013). Evaluation of Public Participation in Tarhhaye Manzar Shahri (Urban Landscape Plans), Honar-Ha-Ziba Memari-Va-Shahrsazi, V. 17, No. 3, spring 2013. [In Persian]
  • Ball M. & Maginn P. J. (2005) Urban Change and Conflict: Evaluating the Role of Partnerships in Urban Regeneration in the UK, Housing Studies, 20(1), 9-28.
  • Carley, M. (2000) Urban Partnerships, Governance and the Regeneration of Britain's Cities, International Planning Studies, 5(3), 273-297.
  • Chang C.L., Wei C. C. & Lee Y.H. (1999) Failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy method and grey theory, Kybernetes, 28(9), 1072 – 1080.
  • Chang K.H., Cheng C.H. & Chang Y.C. (2010) Reprioritization of failures in a silane supply system using an intuitionistic fuzzy set ranking technique, Soft Comput, V. 14, 285–298.
  • Chin K.S., Chan A. & Yang J.B. (2008) Development of a fuzzy FMEA based product design system, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, V. 36, 633–649.
  • Chrysostom S. & Dwivedi R. (2013) A review on the Methodologies used in Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering, 1(6), 12-15.
  • Du Y., Chen S. & Deng Y. (2014) Risk Evaluation in Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Based on Dempster-Shafer Theory and Prospect Theory, Journal of Information & Computational Science 11(4), 1153–1161.
  • Habibi, S. M. & Saeedi Rezvani, H. (2006). Participatory planning; a theoretical exploration in condition of Iran, Honar-Ha-Ziba Memari-Va-Shahrsazi, V. 24, winter 2006. [In Persian]
  • Healey P. (1996) The communicative turn in planning theory and its implication for spatial strategy formation, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, V. 23, 217-234.
  • Huang J., Tzeng G., & Liu H. (2009) A Revised VIKOR Model for Multiple Criteria Decision Making - The Perspective of Regret Theory, Cutting-Edge Research Topics on Multiple Criteria Decision Making Communications in Computer and Information Science, Volume 35, 761–768.
  • Kumru M. & Kumru P.Y. (2013) Fuzzy FMEA application to improve purchasing process in a public hospital, Appl Soft Comput, 13(1), 721-733.
  • Kutlu A. C. & Ekmekçio˘glu M. (2012) Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP, Expert Systems with Applications, V. 39, 61–67.
  • Liu H. C., Liu L., Liu N. & Mao L.X. (2012) Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications, V. 39, 12926–12934.
  • McCarthy J. (2007) Partnership, Collaborative Planning and Urban Regeneration, Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • McDermott R., Mikulak R. & Beauregard M. R. (2009), The basics of FMEA, CRC Press, 2nd Edition.
  • McDonald S., Naglis M. & Vida M. (2009), Urban regeneration for sustainable communites: a case study. Baltic Journal on Sustainability, 15(1), 49-59.
  • Nourian, F. & Ariana, A. (2013). Analyzing Judicial Support for Public Participation in Urban Regeneration Case Study of Imam Ali Square (Ateegh) in Isfahan, Honar-Ha-Ziba Memari-Va-Shahrsazi, V. 17, No. 2, winter 2013. [In Persian]
  • Önüt S., Kara S. S., & Işik E. (2009) Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 3887–3895.
  • Opricovic S. (1998) Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems, Belgrade, Serbia.
  • Opricovic S., & Tzeng G. H. (2002) Multicriteria planning of post-earthquake sustainable reconstruction, Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 17(3), 211–220.
  • Opricovic S., &Tzeng G. H. (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445–455.
  • Opricovic S., & Tzeng G. H. (2007) Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods, European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514–529.
  • Project Management Institute (PMI) (2004) A guide to the project management body of knowledge, 3rd ed., PMI, Wexford.
  • Roberts, P., Sykes, H. (2000), Urban Regeneration: A Handbook, London: Sage Publications.
  • Safari H., Faraji Z., & Majidian S. (2014) Identifying and evaluating enterprise architecture risks using FMEA and fuzzy VIKOR, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. DOI:10.1007/s10845-014-0880-0
  • Stamatis D.H. (1995) Failure mode and effect analysis, Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.
  • Tarkay, G. (2010), Evaluation of Urban Regeneration issues For an Early 20th Century Quarter: KADIKÖY-YELDEĞĠRMENĠ, The Degree of Master of Architecture, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.
  • Tay K. M. & Lim C. P. (2006) Fuzzy FMEA with a guided rules reduction system for prioritization of failures, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 23(8), 1047-1066.
  • Tsenkova, S (2002) Urban Regeneration: Learning from the British Experience, Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary.
  • Wang Y.M., Chin K.S., Poon G. K. K., & Yang J.B. (2009) Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean. Expert Systems with Applications, V. 36, 1195–1207.
  • Yeh C.H. & Deng H. (2004) A practical approach to fuzzy utilities comparison in fuzzy multi criteria analysis, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 35(2), 179–194. DOi:10.1016/j.ijar.2003.09.002.
  • Yu J. H. & Lee S. K. (2012)  A Conflict-Risk Assessment Model for Urban Regeneration Projects Using Fuzzy-FMEA, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 16(7), 1093-1103. DOI 10.1007/s12205-012-1196-2.
  • Zadeh, L.A. (1965) Fuzzy sets, Inform Control, 8, 338-353.
  • Zimmermann, H. J. (2010) Fuzzy set theory, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(3), 317–332. DOI:10.1002/wics.82.