نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه معماری و شهرسازی، واحد بروجرد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بروجرد، ایران.

2 گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، واحد بروجرد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بروجرد، ایران.

3 گروه جغرافیا، واحد تهران، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

4 گروه ریاضی، واحد بروجرد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بروجرد، ایران.

10.22034/urbs.2025.143995.5182

چکیده

تاب‌آوری اجتماعی به‌عنوان یکی از ارکان توسعه پایدار شهری، نقش مهمی در مواجهه با بحران‌ها و نوسانات اجتماعی ایفا می‌کند. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل نقش حکمروایی هوشمند شهری در ارتقای تاب‌آوری اجتماعی، به‌صورت مطالعه موردی در شهر بروجرد انجام شده است. بروجرد با ویژگی‌های خاص فرهنگی، اجتماعی و زیرساختی، بستری مناسب برای بررسی ظرفیت‌های حکمروایی هوشمند فراهم آورده است.این تحقیق از نوع کاربردی و با رویکرد ترکیبی (کمی_کیفی) طراحی شده است. جامعه آماری شامل 380 نفر از شهروندان بروجردی بود که با روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی خوشه‌ای انتخاب شدند. همچنین ۲۰ مصاحبه نیمه‌ساختاریافته با مدیران شهری و صاحب‌نظران حوزه حکمرانی انجام گرفت. داده‌های کمی با بهره‌گیری از مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری در نرم‌افزارهای SPSS و AMOS تحلیل شدند.نتایج نشان داد که حکمروایی هوشمند شهری تأثیر مثبت و معناداری بر تاب‌آوری اجتماعی در بروجرد دارد (ضریب مسیر: ۰.۶۲). مؤلفه‌های مشارکت شهروندی (۰.۳۵)، شفافیت مدیریتی (۰.۲۸) و پاسخگویی نهادی (۰.۱۹) بیشترین نقش را در ارتقای ظرفیت اجتماعی ایفا کرده‌اند. فناوری‌های نوین شهری مانند سامانه‌های ارتباطی دیجیتال و ابزارهای تصمیم‌گیری الکترونیک نیز با ضریب ۰.۴۵ به‌عنوان عوامل تقویت‌کننده شناخته شدند.در بروجرد با وجود برخی محدودیت‌های زیرساختی، تمایل شهروندان به مشارکت الکترونیک رو به افزایش است. با این حال چالش‌هایی مانند ضعف پوشش اینترنت، مقاومت فرهنگی در برابر فناوری‌های نو و تمرکزگرایی در تصمیم‌گیری، مانع تحقق کامل حکمروایی هوشمند هستند. ترکیب راهبردهای حکمروایی مطلوب با فناوری‌های نوین، ظرفیت تاب‌آوری اجتماعی را تا ۳۵ درصد افزایش داده است.در پایان توسعه بسترهای مشارکت الکترونیک، استقرار سامانه‌های هوشمند مدیریت بحران و ارتقای پاسخگویی دیجیتال به‌عنوان راهکارهای عملیاتی برای شهر بروجرد پیشنهاد شده‌اند. این مطالعه الگویی تجربی برای هدایت سیاست‌گذاری شهری در مسیر تاب‌آوری، مشارکت‌محوری و پاسخگویی ارائه می‌دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Analyzing the Role of Smart Urban Governance in Enhancing Social Resilience (Case Study: Borujerd City)

نویسندگان [English]

  • leila sahraei cheshmehsardeh 1
  • alireza Sheikholeslami 2
  • Ahmad Pourahmad 3
  • Hassan Piriaei 4

1 Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Bo.C., Islamic Azad University, Borujerd, Iran.

2 Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Bo.C., Islamic Azad University, Borujerd, Iran.

3 Department of Geography, Tehran Branch, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

4 Department of Mathematics, Bo.C., Islamic Azad University, Borujerd, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Highlights

This study presents an integrated and operational theoretical framework for analyzing smart resilience in developing urban environments.
Smart urban governance demonstrates a strong positive effect (R² = 0.41) on social resilience in Borujerd.
Citizen e-participation emerged as the strongest predictor (β = 0.35) for enhancing resilience capacities.
Digital divide and cultural barriers were identified as the most critical impediments to smart governance implementation.
The research offers practical and context-sensitive policy recommendations, including establishing local resilience hubs and expanding LTE networks.

 
Introduction
Social resilience has increasingly become recognized as a foundational component of sustainable urban development, particularly in cities facing rapid socio-economic transformations, recurring crises, and governance challenges. As urban areas continue to encounter disruptions—ranging from natural hazards and economic shocks to infrastructure failures—understanding how communities adapt, reorganize, and recover has gained renewed scholarly and policy attention. This research investigates the transformative role of smart urban governance in strengthening social resilience, with a focused examination of Borujerd, Iran.
Borujerd, as a mid-sized developing city with diverse socio-cultural characteristics, limited digital infrastructure, and evolving institutional capacities, provides a valuable case for evaluating how smart governance tools can be operationalized in resource-constrained environments. While much of the global literature emphasizes technologically advanced cities, fewer studies have explored how smart governance can catalyze resilience in settings where traditional governance models remain dominant and digital transitions are gradual. Thus, this research fills a significant gap by exploring the intersection of technology, governance innovation, and community resilience within the context of developing urban systems.
Theoretical Framework
The study develops an integrated theoretical model combining smart governance theory with social resilience theory, allowing for a multidimensional analysis of how digital transformations shape community capacities. Drawing on contemporary scholarship in smart city governance (Meijer & Bolívar, 2016; Nam & Pardo, 2011), the framework conceptualizes smart governance as the strategic use of ICT to enhance transparency, efficiency, interdepartmental coordination, and public service responsiveness.
In parallel, the social resilience dimension builds upon Norris et al. (2008), emphasizing adaptive capacities rooted in social networks, institutional support mechanisms, and collective problem-solving. By synthesizing these conceptual strands, the framework proposes that smart governance serves as a catalyst for resilience by expanding access to real-time information, enabling more inclusive citizen–state interactions, and strengthening institutional agility during times of disruption. This theoretical integration contributes to urban governance literature by proposing a holistic model suited to transitional urban contexts.
Methodology
This research applies a mixed-methods design to capture the complexity of resilience and governance dynamics:

Quantitative Component


A stratified cluster survey was conducted with 380 residents of Borujerd (95% confidence level, 5% error).
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using maximum likelihood estimation assessed causal pathways.
Fit indices demonstrated strong model adequacy (CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.06).
Reliability tests indicated robust internal consistency across constructs (Cronbach’s α = 0.82–0.89).


Qualitative Component


Twenty semi-structured interviews with urban planners, municipal experts, ICT officials, and community leaders.
Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo 12 to extract dominant conceptual patterns.
Triangulation was conducted through cross-analysis with local policy documents, e-governance reports, and GIS outputs.

 

Case Analysis


Evaluation of Borujerd’s smart city initiatives from 2021 to 2023.
GIS-based assessment of digital and physical infrastructure distribution.
Institutional capacity analysis focusing on governance readiness, regulatory gaps, and organizational barriers.

Results and Discussion
The findings reveal several major insights with strong practical implications for developing cities:

Governance Impact


Smart governance exerts a robust positive influence on social resilience (β = 0.62, p < 0.001).
The overall model accounts for 41% of variance in resilience outcomes (R² = 0.41), indicating substantial explanatory power.


Key Determinants


Citizen e-participation is the strongest predictor of resilience (β = 0.35), highlighting the central role of digital engagement.
Managerial transparency is associated with a 22% reduction in crisis response time.
Institutional accountability, while significant, exerts a more moderate influence (β = 0.19).


Technology Mediation


Digital platforms significantly amplify governance effectiveness (β = 0.45).
IoT applications—particularly in monitoring infrastructure and emergency alerts—show promise for future resilience planning.


Implementation Challenges


A persistent digital divide affects 42% of peripheral neighborhoods lacking stable internet connectivity.
Cultural resistance, especially among older populations (31%), reduces adoption of digital tools.
Centralized decision-making limits local innovation and flexibility.

Overall, the findings demonstrate that while smart governance contributes meaningfully to resilience—boosting overall resilience capacity by 35%—technological solutions alone are insufficient. The success of smart resilience strategies depends on long-term investments in digital literacy, institutional reforms, participatory mechanisms, and inclusive socio-cultural adaptations.
Conclusion
This research offers three primary contributions:

Theoretical Contribution: It presents an integrated analytical framework linking smart governance and social resilience in developing cities.
Methodological Contribution: It demonstrates the utility of mixed-methods approaches for studying complex urban systems.
Practical Contribution: It provides actionable policy strategies tailored to the socio-cultural and infrastructural realities of Borujerd.

The study recommends:

Expanding LTE and broadband infrastructure to underserved zones.
Developing inclusive and culturally sensitive digital literacy programs.
Establishing neighborhood resilience hubs equipped with hybrid online/offline services.
Implementing digital participatory budgeting to increase civic engagement.

The Borujerd case highlights that successful smart governance requires balancing technological innovation with context-aware, people-centered strategies. The framework developed here offers a replicable model for other developing cities aiming to enhance their resilience through digital transformation.
 
Acknowledgment
This article is derived from an ongoing Ph.D. dissertation in Urban Planning entitled "Explaining and Presenting a Social Resilience Model Based on Good Urban Governance Indicators (Case Study: Borujerd City)", which is being conducted by the first author under the supervision of the second and third authors at Islamic Azad University, Borujerd Branch.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Smart urban governance
  • Social resilience
  • Borujerd city
  • Citizen participation
  • Digital transformation
  • Urban sustainability
  • Crisis management
Abbasi, M., Razavi, S. H., & Mohammadi, M. (2021). Analysis of the role of social capital in urban resilience (Case study: Tehran). Human Geography Research, 53(4), 1021-1038. [in Persian]
Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: Are they related? Progress in Human Geography, 24(3), 347-364.
Akbari, S., & Maleki, A. (2021). Smart urban governance and resilience: The role of digital participation in crisis management. Cities, 115, 103-117. [in Persian]
Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, and performance. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3-21.
Allam, Z., & Dhunny, Z. A. (2019). On big data, artificial intelligence and smart cities. Cities, 89, 80-91.
Angelidou, M. (2017). Smart city policies: A spatial approach. Cities, 41, S3-S11.
Batty, M. (2013). Big data, smart cities and city planning. Dialogues in Human Geography, 3(3), 274-279.
Bibri, S. E. (2018). Smart sustainable cities of the future. Springer.
Capdevila, I., & Zarlenga, M. I. (2015). Smart city or smart citizens? The Barcelona case. Journal of Strategy and Management, 8(3), 266-282.
Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Smart cities in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(2), 65-82.
Colding, J., & Barthel, S. (2019). Exploring the social-ecological systems discourse 20 years later. Ecology and Society, 24(1), 2.
Folke, C. (2016). Resilience (republished). Ecology and Society, 21(4), 44.
Giffinger, R., & Gudrun, H. (2010). Smart cities ranking: An effective instrument for the positioning of cities? ACE: Architecture, City and Environment, 4(12), 7-25.
Harrison, C., & Donnelly, I. A. (2011). A theory of smart cities. Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the ISSS.
Hollands, R. G. (2008). Will the real smart city please stand up? City, 12(3), 303-320.
Hosseini, M., & Shariati, S. (2022). Analysis of smart crisis management systems performance in Mashhad. Urban and Regional Planning Quarterly, 12(45), 33-52. [in Persian]
Hosseini, S. M., & Ahmadi, A. (2022). Smart urban governance and its impact on urban crisis management. Urban Management Quarterly, 22(65), 45-62. [in Persian]
Karimi, A., & Naderi, M. (2023). Measuring social resilience in urban neighborhoods with emphasis on social capital. Human Geography Research, 55(1), 89-106. [in Persian]
Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1-14.
Kourtit, K., Nijkamp, P., & Arribas, D. (2012). Smart cities in perspective. European Planning Studies, 20(2), 249-272.
Meerow, S., & Newell, J. P. (2019). Urban resilience for whom, what, when, where, and why? Urban Geography, 40(3), 309-329.
Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(2), 392-408.
Moradi, R., & Nazeri, A. (2021). Investigating the role of digital participation in social resilience of Shiraz. Urban Studies Journal, 10(38), 75-92. [in Persian]
Mousavi, S. H., & Rezaei, M. (2020). The role of digital technologies in promoting citizen participation in urban management. Information Technology Management Journal, 7(3), 55-72. [in Persian]
Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2011). Smart city as urban innovation: Focusing on management, policy, and context. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, 185-194.
Neirotti, P., De Marco, A., Cagliano, A. C., Mangano, G., & Scorrano, F. (2014). Current trends in smart city initiatives. Cities, 38, 25-36.
Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1-2), 127-150.
Norouzi, M., & Mohammadi, K. (2021). Analysis of barriers to smart governance implementation in Iranian cities. Regional Planning Quarterly, 11(42), 33-50. [in Persian]
Pour Ahmad, A., & Zanganeh, H. (2020). Analysis of the role of smart technologies in promoting urban resilience (Case study: Isfahan). Geography and Urban Development Journal, 8(1), 45-60. [in Persian]
Rahimi, M., & Fallahati, S. (2021). Smart governance and crisis management in Iranian metropolises. Urban and Rural Management Quarterly, 12(36), 77-94. [in Persian]
Rajabzadeh, A., Mohammadi, H., & Norouzi, M. (2023). Institutional trust and information transparency in urban crisis management. Crisis Management Journal, 8(2), 89-104. [in Persian]
Saadat, R., & Moghaddam, P. (2022). Investigating the impact of information transparency on public trust in urban governance. Urban Sociological Studies Journal, 10(2), 123-140. [in Persian]
Sahraei Cheshmeh Sarde, L., Sheikholeslami, A., Pour Ahmad, A., & Piriaei, H. (2025). Evaluation of the Urban Squares Scape Applying the "Simon Bell Landscape Analysis Technique" (Case Study: Qom's Imam Khomeini Square). Motaleate Shahri, 14(56), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1517/Jms.2021.142[in Persian]
Salehi, S., & Rajabi, M. (2023). Digital governance and social resilience: A comparative study of smart cities in developing countries. Urban Studies, 60(4), 789-806.
Sharifi, A., & Yamagata, Y. (2018). Resilient urban planning: Major principles and criteria. Energy Procedia, 61, 1491-1495.
Taghvaei, M., Ghadiri, M., & Safarrad, T. (2022). Smart city technologies and social resilience: Evidence from Iran. Habitat International, 120, 102-115.
Talebpour, M. (2021). The effectiveness of e-participation infrastructure in social cohesion in Mashhad. Social Sciences Quarterly, 28(3), 115-132. [in Persian]
UN-Habitat. (2020). World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization. United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
Yazdani, S., & Alizadeh, A. (2022). Evaluating the impact of smart governance on urban quality of life (Case study: Tabriz). Urban Studies Journal, 14(3), 101-118.