Future Studies of Urban Life: A case study of Khorramabad City

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Engineering, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

2 Department of Geography, Faculty of Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

3 Department of Geography, Acecr of lorestan baranch, Khorramabad, Iran

Abstract

A B S T R A C T
With increasing population and the expansion of urban life, cities have encountered numerous challenges, including physical, social, economic, and environmental issues. Khorramabad City, too, due to rapid population growth (over 30% in recent decades), a scarcity of public services, environmental pollution, and deficiencies in its transportation system, necessitates a comprehensive examination to enhance its urban quality of life. This research was conducted with the aim of analyzing the future of urban livability in Khorramabad and proposing practical scenarios for its improvement. From an objective standpoint, this research is applied, and methodologically, it adopts a mixed-methods (quantitative-qualitative) approach, utilizing a foresight perspective. The requisite data were collected through extensive library resources and the expert opinions of 30 urban specialists (university professors, urban planners, and urban experts). The research instrument was a researcher-designed questionnaire with acceptable reliability (Cronbach's Alpha of 0.780), and data analysis was performed using MICMAC software.The results unequivocally demonstrated that key variables such as the revitalization of neighborhood unit functions, the conservation of natural resources, and endogenous urban development exert the most significant impact on the future urban livability of Khorramabad. These findings are congruent with the theoretical foundations of sustainable development and good urban governance. Based on these findings, a realistic scenario for Khorramabad involves a gradual progression towards a more livable city, emphasizing social participation, sustainable development, and the judicious integration of novel technologies. This research, therefore, provides a robust framework for urban planning and policymaking aimed at improving the urban quality of life.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Khorramabad, the capital city of Lorestan province, has experienced unprecedented population growth—exceeding 30% over the past three decades—resulting in multifaceted challenges spanning the physical, social, economic, and environmental dimensions. Rapid urban expansion without commensurate infrastructure development has caused deficits in public services, environmental pollution, transportation system inefficiencies, and degradation of natural resources. These conditions have adversely impacted residents’ quality of life and highlighted the urgent need to reassess urban development patterns. This study focuses on urban livability as a pivotal analytical framework to examine Khorramabad’s future trajectory and propose pragmatic scenarios for its transformation into a sustainable and human-centered city. Livability here is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct encompassing economic, social, environmental, and cultural spheres, grounded in theories of sustainable development, good urban governance, and urban ecosystem management.
 
Methodology
This research is designed as an applied study with a mixed-methods approach (qualitative-quantitative) grounded in futures studies methodology. Data collection and analysis were conducted in three phases: the qualitative phase involved systematically reviewing 32 scholarly articles and 15 authoritative books to extract key variables, complemented by semi-structured interviews with 10 urban experts. In the quantitative phase, a researcher-developed questionnaire based on a five-point Likert scale (ranging from "no impact" to "highly impactful") was administered, demonstrating acceptable reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.780. The statistical population comprised 30 experts—including 15 university professors, 10 urban managers, and 5 environmental activists—selected through snowball sampling. The inclusion criterion required a minimum of five years of specialized experience in the urban domain. For data analysis, MICMAC software was utilized to construct a 12×12 cross-impact matrix to identify direct and indirect inter-variable relationships. Validation of the results was performed through confirmatory factor analysis and a modified Delphi method.
 
Results and discussion
The MICMAC analysis identified three key variables as the primary drivers of Khorramabad’s urban livability. First, the revival of neighborhood unit functions, with a direct impact score of 971, emphasizes strengthening the role of local communities as cores of social interaction, grounded in the theories of Jane Jacobs (1961) and Patrick Geddes. Second, the conservation of natural resources, scored at 890, highlights the integration of natural elements such as forests and wetlands into the urban fabric, in line with the principles of biophilic cities (Beatley, 2017). Third, internal development and urban synergy, also scored 890, focus on optimizing existing spaces through vertical development, consistent with the visions of Peter Hall (2020) and Edward Glaeser (2013). The cross-impact map reveals that dependent variables like good urban governance and urban security exhibit the highest dependence on other variables, underscoring the necessity of participatory approaches in urban management. Moreover, the indirect effects of “citizens’ perceived security” and “internal development” on quality of life improvement corroborate environmental psychology theories. The dispersion pattern, with 91.66% of the matrix cells filled, reflects a complex network of causal relationships among variables. Ultimately, the realistic scenario for Khorramabad advocates a gradual transition towards a livable city, centered on three main pillars: sustainable transportation development (TOD) aiming to reduce reliance on private vehicles; enhancement of public spaces emphasizing urban legibility (Lynch, 1960) and human-centered design (Gehl, 2013); and integration of sustainability principles in urban planning, including natural resource conservation and pollution reduction.
 
Conclusion
This study examines the future of urban livability in Khorramabad by employing a mixed-methods approach and using MICMAC software alongside expert opinions to analyze the key variables influencing its urban environment. The findings decisively indicate that the variables exerting the greatest impact on Khorramabad’s urban future are neighborhood revitalization, natural resource conservation, and urban infill development. These results align deeply with established theoretical frameworks of sustainable urban development and good urban governance. In particular, the paramount importance of neighborhood revitalization (with a direct impact score of 971) underscores the critical role of urban designers in enhancing urban quality of life and fostering social belonging, consistent with Jane Jacobs’ emphasis on neighborhood diversity and vitality (1961), as well as Patrick Geddes’ theories on socially participatory urban planning. The significant influence of natural resource and capital conservation (score of 890) directly supports the Brundtland Commission’s principles of sustainable development and the concept of biophilic cities, highlighting the necessity of balancing urban growth with environmental preservation for future generations. Additionally, the substantial impact of infill development (score of 890) reinforces the theories of Peter Hall and Edward Glaeser advocating vertical development to optimize land use, reduce urban sprawl, and protect natural and agricultural lands. The study also revealed that “good urban governance” and “urban security” are highly dependent variables, accentuating the essential role of integrated and participatory approaches in urban management, echoing the principles of transparency, citizen engagement, and accountability characteristic of good governance. Furthermore, the indirect effects of “citizens’ perceived security” and “internal and inter-urban development” foreground the psychological and human-centric dimensions of urban design, confirming that urban spaces profoundly influence residents' well-being and satisfaction. This research provides a robust framework to guide urban planning and policy-making in Khorramabad, directing efforts toward a more sustainable and human-centered city. The findings suggest that a realistic scenario for Khorramabad entails gradual progress toward enhanced livability through sustainable social participation, integrated sustainable development strategies, and the prudent incorporation of emerging technologies. Future research could extend this work via longitudinal studies tracking the impacts of policies implemented based on these findings. Additionally, comparative studies with other cities facing similar challenges could yield valuable insights regarding adaptive strategies for improving urban livability. Investigating specific socio-economic and cultural barriers to implementing these key drivers would also offer a more nuanced understanding of effective urban interventions.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
 We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

Keywords


  1. Alipour, M., & Hejazi, S.J. (2014). Investigating the performance of the public transportation system in Khorramabad city (Lorestan province). 15th National Civil Engineering Students Conference, Urmia, 1-20. [In Persian]
  2. Beatley, T. (2017). Handbook of biophilic city planning & design. Publisher: Island Press.
  3. Bhatta, B. (2010). Analysis of urban growth and sprawl from remote sensing data. Publisher: Springer Science & Business Media.
  4. Calthorpe, P. (1993). The next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. Publisher: Princeton Architectural Press.
  5. Carmona, M. (2019). Place value: Place quality and its impact on health, social, economic and environmental outcomes. Journal of Urban Design, 24(1), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2018.1472523
  6. Carmona, M. (2021). Public places urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Publisher: Routledge.
  7. Cohen, S. (2017). The sustainable city. Publisher: Columbia university press.
  8. Congress for the New Urbanism. (2021). Charter of the New Urbanism. Retrieved from https://www.cnu.org
  9. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2002). Subjective Well-Being: The Science of Happiness and Life Satisfaction. Lopez SJ, Snyder CR (eds.), Publisher: Handbook of Positive Psychology.
  10. Du, X. (2023). Urban Livability Research and a Pollution Emission Case Study in Delft. Publisher: Delft University of Technology
  11. Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., & Speck, J. (2000). Suburban nation: The rise of sprawl and the decline of the American dream. Publisher: North Point Press.
  12. Ebrahimpour, H., Rahmati, M. and pashazadeh, A. (2023). Measuring the livability and sustainable tourism of Ardabil city and the relationship between them. Journal of Environmental Science Studies8(1), 6210-6219. doi: 10.22034/jess.2022.366824.1895 (In Persian)
  13. Elmqvist, T., Fragkias, M., Goodness, J., Güneralp, B., Marcotullio, P. J., McDonald, R. I., ... & Wilkinson, C. (2013). Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: challenges and opportunities: a global assessment (p. 755). Publisher: Springer Nature.
  14. Fuller, M., & Moore, R. (2017). An Analysis of Jane Jacobs's The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Publisher: Macat Library.
  15. Gehl, J. (2013). Cities for people. Publisher: Island press.
  16. Geurs, K. T., & Van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005
  17. Glaeser, E. L. (2013). Triumph of the city: How our greatest invention makes us richer, smarter, greener, healthier, and happier (an excerpt). Journal of Economic Sociology14(4), 75-94.
  18. Graham, S., & Marvin, S. (2002). Splintering urbanism: networked infrastructures, technological mobilities and the urban condition. Publisher: Routledge.
  19. Hagerty, M. R., Cummins, R. A., Ferriss, A. L., Land, K., Michalos, A. C., Peterson, M., ... & Vogel, J. (2001). Quality of life indexes for national policy: Review and agenda for research. Social indicators research, 55, 1-96. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010811312332
  20. Hall, P. (2020). The City of Theory: from Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century, 4th edn (2014). In The City Reader (pp. 440-453). Publisher: Routledge.
  21. Hameed, A., Jabeen, I., & Afzal, N. (2022). Towards an eco-friendly future: A corpus-based analysis of media discourse on" Saudi Green Initiative. Lege Artis, 7(1), 84-119.
  22. Hatami Nejad, H, Lorestani, A, Ahmadi, S, Veisi, R. (2015). Spatial analysis of urban service distribution from the perspective of social justice, case: Khorramabad urban areas. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 11(23), 1-21. [In Persian]
  23. Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. Publisher: Random House.
  24. Jacobs, J. (2010). Dark Age Ahead: Author of The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Publisher: Vintage Canada
  25. Leyden, K. M. (2003). Social capital and the built environment: The importance of walkable neighborhoods. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1546-1551. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.93.9.1546
  26. Litman, T. (1995). Evaluating transportation land use impacts. World Transport Policy & Practice, 1(4), 9-16.
  27. Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Publisher: MIT Press.
  28. Lynch, K. (2020). Good city form. Publisher: MIT Press.
  29. Organizacion de Cooperación y Desarrollo Economico. (2013). Guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. OECD.
  30. Oyuni, S., & Samir, H. (2023). What Factors Affect Livability? A Theoretical Review. Cities of the Future: Challenges and Opportunities, 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15460-7_10
  31. Pacione, M. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human wellbeing—A social geographical perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1-2), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00234-7
  32. Saffari, F. nazmfar, H. (2023). Measuring the livability of urban areas with an emphasis on the environmental dimension (case study of district 3 of Ardabil city). Journal of Environmental Science Studies, 8(1), 6220-6228. doi: 10.22034/jess.2022.367177.1897 (In Persian)
  33. Sepahvand, E, Khorshidvand, A. (2014). Study of management and reduction of air pollution in Khorramabad city, Second National and Specialized Conference on Environmental Research in Iran, Hamedan, 1-20[In Persian]
  34. Shamai, A, Teymouri, S, Bahrami-Asl, H. (2016). Spatial analysis of population and municipal services with the approach of spatial justice Case Study: the city Khorramabad. Geography of the Land, 49(13), 47-64. [In Persian]
  35. Sochacka, B. A., Kenway, S. J., & Renouf, M. A. (2021). Liveability and its interpretation in urban water management: Systematic literature review. Cities, 113, 103154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103154
  36. Statistical Center of Iran. (1996-2016). Statistical Yearbook of Lorestan Province. Khorramabad: Publications of Lorestan Province Management and Planning Organization. (In Persian)
  37. Talen, E. (1999). Sense of community and neighbourhood form: An assessment of the social doctrine of new urbanism. Urban studies, 36(8), 1361-1379. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098993033
  38. Teymouri, S., & Mirzapour, S. (2024). Organizing Bus section urban area Khorramabad With an emphasis on Transportation System Management (TSM). Geography and Regional Future Studies, 1(3), 45-63. doi: 10.30466/grfs.2024.54988.1034 [In Persian]
  39. Van Kamp, I., Leidelmeijer, K., Marsman, G., & De Hollander, A. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human well-being: Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1-2), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00232-3
  40. Veenhoven, R. (2008). Comparability of happiness across nations. School of Sociology and Social Work Journal, 104, 211-234. https://personal.eur.nl/veenhoven/Pub2000s/2008f-full.pdf
  41. Zhan, D., Kwan, M. P., Zhang, W., Fan, J., Yu, J., & Dang, Y. (2018). Assessment and determinants of satisfaction with urban livability in China. Cities, 79, 92-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.02.025