Sustainable city

Sustainable city

Identifying and ranking factors influencing desirable urban management in Tehran metropolis

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
1 Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Vali Asr University, Rafsanjan, Iran.
2 Department of Political Geography, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/jsc.2025.519236.1841
Abstract
A B S T R A C T
This study seeks to identify and categorize the factors shaping effective urban management in the Tehran metropolitan area. Its primary objective is to examine the interrelationships among these factors and to determine the key variables that drive improvements in urban management. Initially, the factors influencing effective urban management were identified through semi-structured interviews with 17 experts and practitioners in the field, selected via purposive and judgmental sampling. Subsequently, a comprehensive interpretive structural modeling (ISM) approach was applied to classify the factors, and data analysis was conducted using MICMAC software. The findings reveal that “voluntary activities,” positioned at the fourth hierarchical level, constitute the cornerstone of the model. At the third level, “urban spatial justice” and “quality of civil society” exhibit a reciprocal relationship and exert influence on “outdated managerial practices,” “citizen satisfaction,” and “intervention by informal actors.” In contrast, the variables of “integrated management,” “urban future-building,” “citizen participation,” “informal relations,” and “inflation of urban regulations” exert no direct influence on other factors. The analysis highlights robust interconnections among the model’s components and underscores the significance of certain latent variables in shaping desirable urban management in Tehran. Variables such as “integrated management,” “urban future-building,” “citizen participation,” “informal relations,” “intra-urban spatial justice,” “quality of civil society,” “outdated managerial practices,” “inflation of urban regulations,” “citizen satisfaction,” and “intervention by informal actors” are interlinked in terms of both impact and effectiveness. In this sense, these variables demonstrate both strong influence and high dependency. Among them, “voluntary activities” emerges as a key independent variable with substantial impact on desirable urban management across the Tehran metropolis.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
A review of studies addressing both urban challenges faced by citizens and the management of urban affairs reveals that the current governance system lacks the authority to resolve its inherent problems, yet it retains the capacity and mechanisms to respond to emerging issues. Proposed solutions include decentralizing centralized authority, fostering public participation in urban management, enhancing managerial efficiency, and improving urban quality of life. If effectively implemented, these measures are expected to elevate the overall quality and effectiveness of urban governance. Realizing these objectives requires an urban management system capable of overseeing and directing the city’s entire spatial and functional domains, while coordinating all relevant institutions, stakeholders, and urban territories.
 
Methodology
This study adopts a qualitative research design, with the modeling component conducted through the Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) approach. The research is applied in nature, and a snowball sampling technique was employed to identify relevant experts across different organizations. In total, 17 experts were identified and agreed to participate in the study.
Data were collected through two instruments: (1) a semi-structured Likert-scale questionnaire, designed to assess dimensions of desirable urban management in Tehran based on ISM constructs derived from the literature; and (2) an interpretive structural modeling questionnaire. The closed questionnaire, consisting of 11 items, aimed to evaluate and refine the concept of desirable urban management in Tehran by drawing on participants’ experiential knowledge alongside insights from the research literature.
 
Results and Discussion
The findings indicate that “voluntary activities,” positioned at the fourth hierarchical level, serve as the cornerstone of the model. Accordingly, the stratification of latent variables influencing desirable urban management in the Tehran metropolis begins with this factor and extends to the others. At the third level, “intra-urban spatial justice” and “quality of civil society,” which are closely interrelated, influence the factors situated at the second level.
The second level comprises “outdated managerial practices,” “citizen satisfaction,” and “intervention by informal actors,” which are interrelated and exert influence on the first-level factors. The first level includes “integrated management,” “urban future planning,” “citizen participation,” “informal relations,” and “inflation of urban regulations.” These variables are interconnected with one another but exert no direct influence on other factors independently.
The findings further reveal that no variable falls within the independent category (Group One), underscoring the strong interconnections among the model’s components. Similarly, no variable belongs to the dependent category (Group Two), suggesting the presence of more critical latent variables shaping desirable urban management in the Tehran metropolis. Variables such as “integrated management,” “urban future planning,” “citizen participation,” “informal relations,” “intra-urban spatial justice,” “quality of civil society,” “outdated managerial practices,” “inflation of urban regulations,” “citizen satisfaction,” and “intervention by informal actors” fall within the related variables category (Group Three) in terms of both influence and impact.
 
Conclusion
The MICMAC analysis reveals that none of the variables fall into either the autonomous or dependent categories, highlighting the strong interconnections among components and the inherent complexity of urban management. Integrated management refers to the coordination and synergy among diverse institutions and organizations involved in urban governance. This approach is particularly vital in metropolitan contexts, where multifaceted challenges are more pronounced.
Within an integrated management framework, all stakeholders, including government bodies, municipal authorities, the private sector, and civil society, must be actively engaged in both decision-making and project implementation. Such an approach reduces institutional overlap and conflict while enabling more efficient allocation of resources. The findings further suggest that integrated management enhances the quality of urban services and contributes to higher levels of citizen satisfaction. A coordinated system facilitates the timely identification of citizens’ needs and enables more effective responses. Ultimately, integrated management fosters the development of sustainable and resilient cities in which all stakeholders play an active role in shaping urban futures.
 
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. Adam, A. R., Takyi, S. A., Amponsah, O., & Kyei, K. O. B. (2023). Rethinking sustainable urban management: Effects of urbanization on the socio-spatial structure of the Tamale Metropolis. Urban Governance3(4), 292-303. DOI:10.1016/j.ugj.2023.06.003
  2. Ahmadi, H., Amanpour, S., & Babaei Morad, B. (2024). Explaining the factors influencing the formation of a smart city based on infrastructural resilience: A case study of Ahvaz City. Journal of Sustainable City, 7(4), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.22034/JSC.2025.478479.1805[In Persian].
  3. Bayat, A., & Kawalek, P. (2023). Digitization and urban governance: The city as a reflection of its data infrastructure. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(1), 21-38.‌ https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211033205
  4. Beyene, E., Adam, A. G., & Minale, A. S. (2023). Examining the practice of urban governance using UN-Habitat urban governance index in Gondar city, North West Ethiopia. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), 2208934.‌ https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2208934
  5. Broccardo, L., Culasso, F., & Mauro, S. G. (2019). Smart City Governance: Exploring the Institutional Work of Multiple Actors towards Collaboration. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32(4), 367-387. DOI:10.1108/IJPSM-05-2018-0126
  6. Calhoun, C., Gerteis, J., Moody, J., Pfaff, S., & Virk, I. (Eds.). (2022). Classical sociological theory. John Wiley & Sons.‌ https://www.amazon.com/Classical-Sociological-Theory-Joseph-Gerteis/dp/1119527368
  7. Cappa, F., Franco, S., & Rosso, F. (2021). Citizens and cities: Leveraging citizen science and big data for sustainable urban development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(2), 648-667. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2942
  8. Diehl, A. (2022). The theory of will in classical antiquity. Univ of California Press.‌ https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Will-Classical-Antiquity/dp/0520308603
  9. Dong, M. W. Y. (2023). A Critical Analysis on Complex Urban Systems and Complex Systems Theory. Journal of Computing and Natural Science, 3(1), 024-034.‌
  10. Famili Khalili, R., Pourahmad, A., Hataminejad, H., & Ziyari, K. (2024). Evaluating the role of good urban governance on the resilience of urban neighborhoods: A case study of Shemiran Now neighborhood, Tehran. Journal of Sustainable City, 7(4), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.22034/JSC.2022.284856.1582[In Persian].
  11. Frey, K. (2023). Development, good governance, and local democracy. Brazilian Political Science Review, 2, 39-73.‌ https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-3845200800020002
  12. Hallie,E., Svenja,K., & Vanessa,L. (2022). Uncomfortable knowledge: Mechanisms of urban development in adaptation governance. World Development. 159,  106056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106056
  13. Hendrar, P., Budi, S., & Teguh, Y. (2022). Semarang Smart City Governance model. European journal of humanities and social sciences Учредители: Premier Publishing sro, (1), 3-18. DOI: 10.29013/EJHSS-22-1-3-18
  14. Hien, B. N. (2021). Building Urban Government in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT)12(6), 4347-4354. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i6.8420
  15. Hojjati, S. M., & Komaili, M. (2017). Assessing citizen participation in desirable urban management (A case study of Region 8 of Qom). Urban Management Studies, 9(29). [In Persian].
  16. Homajani, Sh., Sarvar, R., Amir-Ezadi, T., & Arbab Sabzevari, A. (2022). A comparative analysis of good urban governance: A case study of Regions 2 and 10 of Tehran. Geography Quarterly, 20(72), 79-94. http://dor.net/dor/20.1001.1.27833739.1401.20.72.5.1[In Persian].
  17. Irani, M., & Rahnamayiezekavat, P. R. (2021). An overview of urban resilience: dimensions, components, and approaches. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum: Administratio Locorum, 305-322. https://doi.org/10.31648/aspal.7054
  18. Khatam, S., & Ahmadipour, Z. (2022). Analyzing effective indicators of political management of space in Tehran metropolis. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 44(4), 1411–1417. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.44428-960
  19. Kisser, I. (2023). Interdependence and Complementarity of a Multi-Dimensional Concept of Sustainable Development and the Integrated Approach to Urban Governance—Case Study City of Zagreb. Sustainability, 15(12), 9213. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129213‌
  20. Komasi, H., & Hosseini, S. A. (2014). Explaining the relationship between urban management performance and citizens' social capital (A case study: Northern Valiasr neighborhood). Spatial Planning, 4(3), 153-156. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.22287485.1393.4.3.8.6[In Persian].
  21. Korosteleva, E. A., & Flockhart, T. (2020). Resilience in EU and International Institutions: Redefining Local Ownership in a New Global Governance Agenda. Contemporary Security Policy, 41(2), 153-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2020.1723973
  22. Lambert, M. R., & Donihue, C. M. (2020). Urban biodiversity management using evolutionary tools. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 4(7), 903-910.‌
  23. Lee-Smith, D. (2019). Urban management in Nairobi: A case study of the matatu mode of public transport. In African Cities in Crisis (pp. 276-304). https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780429048227-10/urban-management-nairobi-case-study-matatu-mode-public-transport-diana-lee-smith
  24. Liu, L. (2021). Research on problems and countermeasures of urban social governance based on behavioral psychologyPsychiatria Danubina33(suppl 8), 194-195.
  25. Mashhadi, A. J., Garcia Gonzalez, M. C., & Issa Zadeh, S. B. (2024). The Evolution of Sustainable Urban Development: A Management Perspective. Available at SSRN 4671959. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4671959
  26. Mehmandoost, H., Rezaei Far, M., & Yaqoubi, N. (2023). Designing a model of public persuasion in the context of good urban governance. Public Administration, 15(3), 615-636. https://doi.org/10.22059/jipa.2023.363431.3370[In Persian].
  27. Meyer, N., & Auriacombe, C. (2019). Good urban governance and city resilience: An afrocentric approach to sustainable development. Sustainability, 11(19), 5514.‌ https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195514
  28. Mojtabazadeh Khaneghahi, H., Mohammadi, N., & Tavakkolan, A. (2021). An analysis of urban governance based on providing an optimal model (A case study of Garmdareh City). Applied Research in Geographical Sciences, 21(63), 361-380. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22287736.1400.21.63.18.0[In Persian].
  29. Omri, A., & Mabrouk, N. (2020. (Good governance for sustainable development goals: Getting ahead of the pack or falling behind?. Environmental Impact Assessment Review83, 106388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106388
  30. Parvizan, E., Karkhehabadi, Z., & Arghan, A. (2018). Measuring sustainable development indicators towards the formation of sustainable neighborhood development in Mahabad City. Journal of Sustainable City, 1(1), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.22034/jsc.2018.87479[In Persian].
  31. Przeybilovicz, E., & Cunha, M. A. (2024). Governing in the digital age: The emergence of dynamic smart urban governance modes. Government Information Quarterly, 41(1), 101907.‌ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101907
  32. Sivero, L. M., Bartocci, L., Lehtonen, P., & Ebdon, C. (2024). Toward sustainable governance with participatory budgeting. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 36(1), 1-19.‌ https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-11-2023-0205
  33. Song, K., Chen, Y., Duan, Y., & Zheng, Y. (2023). Urban governance: A review of intellectual structure and topic evolution. Urban Governance.‌ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2023.06.001
  34. Van den Buuse, D., van Winden, W., & Schrama, W. (2020). Balancing exploration and exploitation in sustainable urban innovation: an ambidexterity perspective toward smart cities. In Sustainable Smart City Transitions . https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2020.1835048
  35. Virtudes, A. (2016). ‘Good’Governance Principles in Spatial Planning at Local Scale. Procedia engineering, 161, 1710-1714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.650
  36. Wang, C., Zhan, J., & Xin, Z. (2020). Comparative analysis of urban ecological management models incorporating low-carbon transformation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 159, 120190.‌ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120190
  37. Xie, F., Liu, G., & Zhuang, T. (2021). A comprehensive review of urban regeneration governance for developing appropriate governance arrangements. Land10(5), 545. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10050545
  38. Yang, H. (2021). Holistic Governance: An Explanatory Framework, In: Urban Governance in Transition (pp. 57-95). DOI:10.1007/978-981-15-7082-7_4
  39. Ye, C., Zhang, F., Mu, L., Gao, Y., & Liu, Y. (2020). Urban function recognition by integrating social media and street-level imagery. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science48(6), 1430-1444. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320935467
  40. Zalar, A., & Pries, J. (2022). Unmapping green space: Discursive dispossession of the right to green space by a compact city planning epistemology. City, 26(1), 51-73.‌ https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2021.2018860
  41. Zanjani, N. E., Goodarzi, G., & Zanjani, S. E. (2021). Original Reserch Paper The model of good sustainable urban governance based on ESG concepts. DOI: 10.22034/ijumes.2017.18.12.027
  42. Zeng, X., Yu, Y., Yang, S., Lv, Y., & Sarker, M. N. I. (2022). Urban resilience for urban sustainability: Concepts, dimensions, and perspectives. Sustainability14(5), 2481. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052481