مدیریت بحران

مدیریت بحران

مدل‌سازی تغییرات مکانی تاب‌آوری اجتماعی با استفاده از سیستم‌ اطلاعات جغرافیایی (مطالعه موردی: شهر سرپل‌ذهاب)

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری جمعیت شناسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 پژوهشگر ارشد هسته دفاع غیرعامل موسسه آموزشی و تحقیقاتی صنایع دفاعی، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
مدل‌سازی مکانی تاب‌آوری اجتماعی به‌عنوان یک رویکرد نوین دفاعی و شناسایی پارامترهای مؤثر بر آن نقش کلیدی را در آمادگی دفاعی شهرها ایفا می­کند. هدف از این پژوهش ارائه رویکرد جدیدی بر مبنای سیستم­ اطلاعات جغرافیایی برای مدل‌سازی تاب‌آوری اجتماعی است. این رویکرد تازه به‌صورت موردی برای شهر سرپل‌ذهاب به‌عنوان یکی از شهرهای پرمخاطره کشور در چند دهه اخیر استفاده شده است. برای این منظور از مجموعه 10 شاخص و 29 معیار مؤثر بر تاب‌آوری اجتماعی استفاده شد. از روش وزن‌دهی AHP برای تعیین وزن معیارهای مختلف و از مدل WLC برای تلفیق معیارهای مؤثر برای تولید نقشه پتانسیل مکانی تاب‌آوری اجتماعی استفاده شده است. در نهایت برای ارزیابی کارایی مدل ارائه­شده ضریب همبستگی بین مقادیر پتانسیل مکانی تاب‌آوری اجتماعی به‌دست‌آمده از مدل WLC و میزان دقت نقشه تاب‌آوری اجتماعی بر اساس اطلاعات جمع‌آوری‌شده از طریق پرسش‌نامه محاسبه شد. نتایج این پژوهش نشان داد که در بین شاخص‌های مؤثر بر تاب‌آوری اجتماعی، شاخص‌های سرمایه اجتماعی و آسیب‌پذیری اجتماعی بیشترین تأثیر را بر مدل‌سازی تاب‌آوری اجتماعی داشته­اند. همچنین بیشتر حوزه‌های شهری(60 درصد) از لحاظ تاب‌آوری اجتماعی در سطح پایین و جزو مناطق آسیب‌پذیر شهری به‌حساب می­‌آیند که این امر نشان‌دهنده کاهش توان دفاعی شهری در مقابل شوک‌ها و حوادث است.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Modeling spatial changes of social resilience using geographic information system (Case study: Sarpol-e Zahab city)

نویسندگان English

davoud shahpari 1
Abolfazl Majidi 2
1 PhD student in demography at University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Senior researcher in the passive defense core of the defense industry training and research institute, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده English

Spatial modeling of social resilience as a new defense approach and identification of parameters affecting it plays a key role in the defense readiness of cities. The purpose of this study is to present a new approach based on geographic information system for social resilience modeling. This new approach has been used on a case-by-case basis for the city of Sarpol-e Zahab as one of the most risky cities in the country in recent decades. For this purpose, a set of 10 indicators and 29 criteria affecting social resilience was used. AHP weighting method has been used to determine the weight of different criteria and the WLC model has been used to combine effective criteria to produce a map of spatial potential of social resilience. Finally, to evaluate the efficiency of the proposed model, the correlation coefficient between the values of spatial potential of social resilience obtained from the WLC model and the accuracy of the social resilience map was calculated based on the information collected through a questionnaire.   The results of this study showed that among the indicators affecting social resilience, indicators of social capital and social vulnerability had the greatest impact on modeling social resilience. Also, most urban areas (60%) are considered as low-level and vulnerable urban areas in terms of social resilience, which indicates a decrease in urban defense capacity against shocks and accidents.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Social resilience
Urban defense
Geographic information system
Spatial modeling
  1. DESA, U., World urbanization prospects 2018. United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affiars, 2018.
  2. Huck, A., J. Monstadt, and P. Driessen, Building urban and infrastructure resilience through connectivity: An institutional perspective on disaster risk management in Christchurch, New Zealand. Cities, 2020. 98: p. 102573.
  3. Meerow, S. and J.P. Newell, Urban resilience for whom, what, when, where, and why? Urban Geography, 2019. 40(3): p. 309-329.
  4. Normandin, J.-M., et al., The definition of urban resilience: A transformation path towards collaborative urban risk governance, in Urban resilience for risk and adaptation governance. 2019, Springer. p. 9-25.
  5. Bush, J. and A. Doyon, Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: How can urban planning contribute? Cities, 2019. 95: p. 102483.
  6. Mitchell, T. and K. Harris, Resilience: A risk management approach. ODI background note, 2012: p. 1-7.
  7. Kimhi, S., Levels of resilience: Associations among individual, community, and national resilience. Journal of health psychology, 2016. 21(2): p. 164-170.
  8. Aldrich, D.P. and M.A. Meyer, Social capital and community resilience. American behavioral scientist, 2015. 59(2): p. 254-269.
  9. Cutter, L., et al., Community and regional resilience to natural disasters: perspective from hazards, disasters and emergency management. 2008, CARRI research report 1. Community and Regional Resilience Institute, Oak Ridge.
  10. Shamsuddin, S., Resilience resistance: The challenges and implications of urban resilience implementation. Cities, 2020: p. 102763.
  11. Meerow, S., J.P. Newell, and M. Stults, Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and urban planning, 2016. 147: p. 38-49.
  12. Zhang, X. and H. Li, Urban resilience and urban sustainability: What we know and what do not know? Cities, 2018. 72: p. 141-148.
  13. Beatley, T. and P. Newman, Biophilic cities are sustainable, resilient cities. Sustainability, 2013. 5(8): p. 3328-3345.
  14. Windle, G., What is resilience? A review and concept analysis. Reviews in clinical gerontology, 2011. 21(2): p. 152.
  15. Sachdeva, M., Urban Resilience and Urban Sustainability. 2016, Columbia University.
  16. Chen, C., et al., A new model for describing the urban resilience considering adaptability, resistance and recovery. Safety science, 2020. 128: p. 104756.
  17. Malczewski, J. and C. Rinner, Multicriteria decision analysis in geographic information science. 2015: Springer.
  18. Aksoy, E. and B.T. San, Geographical information systems (GIS) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) integration for sustainable landfill site selection considering dynamic data source. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2019. 78(2): p. 779-791.
  19. Fernández, D. and M. Lutz, Urban flood hazard zoning in Tucumán Province, Argentina, using GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Engineering Geology, 2010. 111(1-4): p. 90-98.
  20. Kumar, A., et al., A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017. 69: p. 596-609.
  21. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., Web 2.0-based collaborative multicriteria spatial decision support system: a case study of human-computer interaction patterns. 2013.
  22. Yalcin, M. and F.K. Gul, A GIS-based multi criteria decision analysis approach for exploring geothermal resources: Akarcay basin (Afyonkarahisar). Geothermics, 2017. 67: p. 18-28.
  23. Mahdy, M. and A.S. Bahaj, Multi criteria decision analysis for offshore wind energy potential in Egypt. Renewable energy, 2018. 118: p. 278-289.
  24. Bacca, E.J.M., A. Knight, and M. Trifkovic, Optimal land use and distributed generation technology selection via geographic-based multicriteria decision analysis and mixed-integer programming. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2020: p. 102055.
  25. Ristić, V., et al., Land-use evaluation for sustainable construction in a protected area: A case of Sara mountain national park. Journal of environmental management, 2018. 206: p. 430-445.
  26. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., A. Sadeghi-Niaraki, and S.-M. Choi, Semantic interoperability of GIS and MCDA tools for environmental assessment and decision making. Environmental modelling & software, 2018. 100: p. 104-122.
  27. De Feo, G. and S. De Gisi, Using MCDA and GIS for hazardous waste landfill siting considering land scarcity for waste disposal. Waste management, 2014. 34(11): p. 2225-2238.
  28. Anwarzai, M.A. and K. Nagasaka, Utility-scale implementable potential of wind and solar energies for Afghanistan using GIS multi-criteria decision analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017. 71: p. 150-160.
  29. Klein, R.J., R.J. Nicholls, and F. Thomalla, Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept? Global environmental change part B: environmental hazards, 2003. 5(1): p. 35-45.
  30. Nelson, D.R., W.N. Adger, and K. Brown, Adaptation to environmental change: contributions of a resilience framework. Annual review of Environment and Resources, 2007. 32.
  31. Holling, C.S., Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual review of ecology and systematics, 1973. 4(1): p. 1-23.
  32. Dovers, S.R. and J.W. Handmer, Uncertainty, sustainability and change. Global Environmental Change, 1992. 2(4): p. 262-276.
  33. Pickett, S.T., M.L. Cadenasso, and B. McGrath, Resilience in ecology and urban design: linking theory and practice for sustainable cities. Vol. 3. 2013: Springer Science & Business Media.
  34. Arghandeh, R., et al., On the definition of cyber-physical resilience in power systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016. 58: p. 1060-1069.
  35. Lucini, B., Social capital and sociological resilience in megacities context. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 2013. 4(1): p. 58-71.
  36. Wilson, G., Community resilience and environmental transitions. 2012: Routledge.
  37. Keck, M. and P. Sakdapolrak, What is social resilience? Lessons learned and ways forward. Erdkunde, 2013: p. 5-19.
  38. Adger, W.N., Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Progress in human geography, 2000. 24(3): p. 347-364.
  39. Bonanno, G.A., S.A. Romero, and S.I. Klein, The temporal elements of psychological resilience: An integrative framework for the study of individuals, families, and communities. Psychological Inquiry, 2015. 26(2): p. 139-169.
  40. Folke, C., Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global environmental change, 2006. 16(3): p. 253-267.
  41. Sapirstein, G., Social resilience: the forgotten dimension of disaster risk reduction. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 2006. 1(1): p. 54-63.
  42. Maguire, B. and P. Hagan, Disasters and communities: understanding social resilience. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, The, 2007. 22(2): p. 16.
  43. Boyden, J., Children under fire: challenging assumptions about children's resilience. Children Youth and Environments, 2003. 13(1): p. 1-29.
  44. Joerin, J., et al., The adoption of a climate disaster resilience index in Chennai, India. Disasters, 2014. 38(3): p. 540-561.
  45. رضایی, م., تبیین تاب‌آوری اجتماعات شهری به‌منظور کاهش اثرات سوانح طبیعی (زلزله)؛ مطالعه موردی: کلان‌شهر تهران. رساله دکتری, دانشکده جغرافیا, دانشگاه تربیت مدرس, 1390.
  46. میرزایی, ا., بررسی کاربرد رویکرد تاب‌آوری در برنامه‌ریزی شهری جهت کاهش اثرات سوانح طبیعی (موردمطالعه: شهر سنندج). پایان‌نامه برای دریافت درجه کارشناسی ارشد در رشته برنامه‌ریزی شهری, گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه ارومیه, 1393.
  47. کاظمیان, غ,. باقری, ه,. شجاعی, م., بررسی میزان حمایت از مفهوم تاب‌آوری شهری در قوانین شهری ایران. اولین کنفرانس ملی شهرسازی, مدیریت شهری و توسعه پایدار, تهران: موسسه ایرانیان, انجمن معماری ایران,1393, 113-127.
  48. صباحی گراغانی, ی., سنجش تاب‌آوری شهروندان در جهت کاهش بحران‌های طبیعی زلزله (مطالعه موردی: شهر کرمان). پایان‌نامه برای دریافت درجه کارشناسی ارشد, دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی, دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان, 1395.
  49. محمدی, س,. منوچهری, م., تحلیلی بر ارتباط زیست پذیری و تاب‌آوری جوامع روستایی (مطالعه موردی: روستاهای شهرستان مریوان), فصلنامه علمی - پژوهشی برنامه‌ریزی فضایی (جغرافیا), 1397, سال هشتم, شماره چهارم, 89-110.
  50. Cutter, S.L., et al., A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global environmental change, 2008. 18(4): p. 598-606.
  51. Obrist, B., C. Pfeiffer, and R. Henley, Multi‐layered social resilience: A new approach in mitigation research. Progress in Development Studies, 2010. 10(4): p. 283-293.
  52. Tyler, S. and M. Moench, A framework for urban climate resilience. Climate and development, 2012. 4(4): p. 311-326.
  53. Jabareen, Y., Planning the resilient city: Concepts and strategies for coping with climate change and environmental risk. Cities, 2013. 31: p. 220-229.
  54. Peregrine, P.N., Political participation and long-term resilience in pre-Columbian societies. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 2017.
  55. Boloorani, A.D., et al., Identification of dust sources using long term satellite and climatic data: A case study of Tigris and Euphrates basin. Atmospheric Environment, 2020. 224: p. 117299.
  56. Saaty, T.L., Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management science, 1986. 32(7): p. 841-855.
  57. Saaty, T.L., Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 2008. 1(1): p. 83-98.
  58. Mekonnen, A.D. and P.V. Gorsevski, A web-based participatory GIS (PGIS) for offshore wind farm suitability within Lake Erie, Ohio. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015. 41: p. 162-177.
  59. Shorabeh, S.N., et al., A risk-based multi-criteria spatial decision analysis for solar power plant site selection in different climates: A case study in Iran. Renewable Energy, 2019. 143: p. 958-973.
  60. Shahabi, H., et al., Evaluating Boolean, AHP and WLC methods for the selection of waste landfill sites using GIS and satellite images. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2014. 71(9): p. 4221-4233.
  61. Hajizadeh, F., M. Poshidehro, and E. Yousefi, Scenario-based capability evaluation of ecotourism development–an integrated approach based on WLC, and FUZZY–OWA methods. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 2020. 25(6): p. 627-640.
  62. Thill, J.-C., Spatial multicriteria decision making and analysis: a geographic information sciences approach. 2019: Routledge.
دوره 10، ویژه نامه پدافند غیرعامل
ویژه نامه پدافند غیرعامل
اسفند 1400
صفحه 28-48

  • تاریخ دریافت 20 آذر 1399
  • تاریخ بازنگری 10 تیر 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش 20 دی 1400