Futuristic research on societal security in the urban system of Iran: Understanding indicators for explaining, measuring and prioritizing

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D.Student in Urbanism School of Architecture and Environmental Design Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Urbanism, School of Architecture Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Prof, Department of Urbanism, School of Architecture Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

There is no component more important to the development, prosperity and flourishing of a society's talents than the element of security and peace in society. Without spatial security, social development and creativity wouldn’t be possible. Exploring the concept and indicators of societal security as a useful tool for public policy and decision-making in urban affairs is an inevitable necessity. Describing and explaining the societal security of the urban system in the future can reduce the occurrence of a variety of societal anomalies. This study investigates and formulates the dimensions explaining the societal security of the Iranian urban system from a futuristic perspective. Descriptive-analytical method, exploratory factor analysis and network analysis were used In order to find an answer to the question that which definition and indexing system is more suitable for explaining societal security in the urban system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In order to conduct this research we first searched library sources and specialized journals related to security and research projects carried out by related organizations and studied them. Then, by analyzing the studies and refining and clarifying them, the main general indicators were specified. Based on the findings of the research, the main components/dimensions for measuring societal security in Iran's urban system includes economic, social, cultural, political, life and honor security, religious and Islamic, environmental and spatial dimensions. These findings are based on the applied indicators and components used in urban settlements. Finally, based on the integration of factor analysis and network analysis prioritization of the components and indicators in the future urban system was achieved.

Keywords

References

  • Alford, R. P. (2012). A broken windows theory of international corruption. Ohio St. LJ, 73, 1253.‏
  • Brimmer, E. (2006). Transforming homeland security: US and European Approaches. Center for Transatlantic Relations, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.‏
  • Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. H. (2019). How to Balance Individual Rights and Societal Security? The View of Civil Servants. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 1-17.‏
  • Clarke, V. (1997).Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies, 2nd edition, New York, Harrow & Hesston.
  • Cozens, P. M. (2002). Sustainable urban development and crime prevention through environmental design for the British city. Towards an effective urban environmentalism for the 21st century. Cities, 19(2), 129-137.‏
  • Cześnik, M. (2006). Voter turnout and democratic legitimacy in Central Eastern Europe. Polish Sociological Review, 156(4), 449-470.‏
  • Drags and Crime Prevention Committee. (2013). Inquiry into the Application of Safer Degine Principals and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. Authority   Government Printer for State of Victoria.
  • Effendi, Y. (2019). Societal Security and Human Development: An Indonesian-Islam Perspective. Journal of Islamic Civilization, 1(1), 17-29.‏
  • Emerson, J., Esty, D. & Angel, H. (2012). Environmental Performance Index and Pilot Trend EnvironmentalPerformance Index. Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, Yale University.
  • Jacobs, J. (1965). The Dead and Life of Great American Cities, Random House.
  • Kelly, E. & Crabtree, D. (2009). Securing the Built Environment: Analysis Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana.
  • Kitchen, T., & Schneider, R. H. (2007). Crime prevention and the built environment. Routledge.‏
  • Komeyli, Mohammad. (2008). Urban Identity Cognition of Bandar-Abbas. Soffeh Journal, 17(46), 167-180.
  • Lin, N. (2001). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge University press.
  • Loginova, J. (2018). Achieving Human and Societal Security in Oil Producing Regions: A Komi-Izhma Community Perspective from Pripechor’e, Russia. In Human and Societal Security in the Circumpolar Arctic (pp. 191-211). Brill Nijhoff.‏
  • Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance, security and social sorting: emerging research priorities. International criminal justice review, 17(3), 161-170.‏
  • Minner, J. & Lim, B.)2005(. Measuring Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, Journal of Architectural and PlanningResearch, vol. 330.
  • Newman, O. (1973). Defensible Spaces: People & Design in Violent City, Architectural Press.
  • Reynald, D. M., & Elffers, H. (2009). The future of Newman's Defensible Space Theory: Linking Defensible Space and the routine activities of place. European Journal of Criminology, 6(1), 25-46.‏
  • Siebel, W., & Wehrheim, J. (2006). Security and the urban public sphere. German policy studies, 3(1), 19.‏
  • Weisburd,  D. (2004).   Criminal  Careers   of   Places:   a    Longitudinal    Study, U.S. Department  of      Justice,      National        Institute        of        Justice.

Zebardast, E. (2013). Constructing a social vulnerability index to earthquake hazards using a hybrid factor analysis and analytic network process (F’ANP) model. Natural hazards, 65(3), 1331-1359.‏

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics