Explaining the Effective Factors on Urban Livability Case Study: Ilam City

Document Type : Article extracted From phd dissertation


1 PNU Faculty member

2 Alzahra faclty member

3 Azad Faculty member

4 azad faclty member



Extended Abstract
The collected statistics by the United Nations in 1991 shows that in the mid-1990 about 45% or 5.4 billion people of the world population lived in the cities or towns. It has been predicted that in 2025 this population reaches 65%. The growth of population along with the increasing proportion of urbanization and its continued growth lead to the detrimental consequences and create problems for the cities. Various studies show that the necessity to deal with the urban livability in relation to the new duties of planning to response the needs of the post-industrial society, which is seriously seeking facilities and quality of life, has significantly increased on the one hand and the livability has gained a twofold importance, due to the threats facing urban life, on the other hand. According to the livability of the cities is different based on the local and indigenous conditions and characteristics of each city, it is necessary to evaluate and explain the livability of cities, which is the result of the plans and policies, etc. in them. In the meanwhile, Ilam, apart from its appropriate capacities for livability, is far from its parameters due to problems such as environmental pollutions, ethnocentrism, the decrease of the feeling of belonging to the place, being surrounded by the mountains, bourgeoisie, shortage of the land, weariness of the urban texture, unplanned immigration from the villages and suburbs to Ilam and so on. Due to the convergence of the problems and the difficulties, attempts to revive the sustainability and livability of Ilam seem necessary that the scientific recognition of this phenomenon is prerequisite.
The present study, with the consideration of its nature and goal, is an applied research and a descriptive-analytical one by its methodology. The statistical society of the research includes all over 18 male and female citizens living in Ilam. Based on Cochran formula the number of the subjects of the sample to be studied in entire Ilam, with an error of 0.05, was 383 who are distributed with the consideration of the population of the subjects of 18 or higher in each neighborhood. Ilam has been composed of four districts. Three neighborhoods have been selected randomly from each district. The research measurement instrument was the questionnaire along with interview. For this purpose, the livability inventory, containing 48 items, has been evaluated whose reliability has been confirmed based on researches were done. The indices of livability with three main economic, social, and environmental dimensions in Likert level have been measured by the standardized livability inventory. In this research, the effect of these indices (as the dependent variable) on independent variables (views on the cultural atmosphere, the feeling of urban well-being, view on the city’s management, and the feeling of security) have been taken into consideration.
Results and discussion
Based on an 18-90 scale, the average of satisfaction with economic livability among the respondents was 49.10 which implies their moderate satisfaction. On the satisfaction with social livability, the average was 55.00 of 19 to 95 which shows their moderate satisfaction. The last dimension was the environmental livability. The average satisfaction with environmental livability was 32.66. as the range of this scale was between 11 to 55, the statistical findings show that the respondents are highly satisfied with environmental livability. The data of regression test show that the value of adjusted R equals 0.211. So, it can be said that the analytical model used has calculated 21.9% change in social livability. In other words, 21.9% of the changes in social livability is predictable based on the variables of views on urban management performance, the feeling of urban well-being, feeling of security, and approaches to the cultural atmosphere. The data od Beta in table 7 shows that the level of the direct effects of independent variables on the feeling of social livability in assessment of well-being feeling was 0.092%, approach to cultural atmosphere was 0.342%, the feeling of urban security was 0.168%, and view on the performance of urban management was 0.092%.
The findings of the research on the satisfaction level with the different aspects of livability indicate that the citizens are moderately satisfied with the city’s economic livability. A review of the indices of economic livability shows that habitation and its quality have the worst quality from among other variables to which the main reason of dissatisfaction refers. The weaknesses of urban transportation infrastructures and inappropriate conditions of employment and low income are the other sources of low satisfaction with economic livability. The average satisfaction with social livability by Ilam citizens has been reported moderate. Satisfaction with social livability can be evaluated in the shadow of its elements. Social cohesiveness as one of the elements of social livability is in a good position under the influence of intellectual backgrounds, beliefs, and the identity elements remained from the traditions and the past. Of the other elements of social livability is the city’s hygienic conditions. Regarding environmental livability as the last aspect of the urban livability, with which the citizens are relatively satisfied, it can be said that during the past years Ilam has been confronting several problems resulting from population growth and the spread of the area of the city, the low per capita of the green space and its unequal distribution, negligence of the indices of environmental sustainability. In the explanatory findings section, the relationship and direct effect of independent research variables on urban livability in all its dimensions were confirmed, that is, the higher the feeling of urban security and the feeling of urban well-being, the higher the positive approach to the cultural atmosphere and to the performance of the urban management.


  1. بندر آباد، علیرضا (۱۳۹۰) شهر زیست پذیر از مبانی تا معنا، چاپ اول، تهران: انتشارات آذرخش.
  2. بندرآباد، علیرضا و احمدی‌نژاد، فرشته (1393) ارزیابی شاخص‌های کیفیت زندگی با تأکید بر اصول شهر زیست پذیر در منطقه 22 تهران، فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دوره 5، شماره 16، صص. 74-55.
  3. تردست، زهرا؛ نیک‌سرشت، مهدی؛ مشکینی، ابوالفضل (1398) تبیین الگوی سازمان‌یابی فضایی زیست پذیری شهری (نمونه موردی: شهر ایلام)، فصلنامه مطالعات ساختارها و کارکرد شهری، دوره 6، شماره 20، صص. 125- 105.
  4. حبیبی، داود؛ قشقایی، رضا؛ فرزاد حیدری (1392) نگاهی به ویژگی‌های و معیارهای شهر زیست پذیر، کنفرانس بین‌المللی عمران معماری و توسعه شهری پایدار، تبریز، دانشگاه تبریز.
  5. خراسانی، محمدامین و رضوانی، محمدرضا (1392) شناخت و تحلیل تفاوت زیست پذیری روستاهای پیرامون شهری در شهرستان ورامین، فصلنامه فضا و توسعه روستایی، سال 2، شماره 2، صص. 73-55.
  6. خراسانی، محمدحسین (۱۳۹۳) سکونتگاه زیست پذیر، سکونتگاه پایدار، همایش علوم جغرافیایی ایران، تهران، دانشگاه تهران.
  7. گلکار، کوروش (1385) نشاط و سرزندگی در شهر به کمک طراحی شهری، مجله شهر نگار، سال 7، شماره 39، صص. 28-24.
  8. رهنما، محمدرحیم؛ قنبری، محمد؛ محمدی حمیدی، سمیه؛ حسینی، سید مصطفی (1398) ارزیابی و سنجش زیست پذیری شهری در کلان‌شهر اهواز، فصلنامه شهر پایدار، سال 2، شماره 2، صص. 17-1.
  9. ساسان پور، فرزانه؛ تولایی، سیمین؛ جعفری اسدآبادی، حمزه (1394) سنجش و ارزیابی زیست پذیری شهری در مناطق بیست و دوگانه کلان‌شهر تهران، فصلنامه برنامه‌ریزی منطقه‌ای، سال 5، شماره 18، صص. 42-27.
  10. سلیمانی مهرنجابی، محمد؛ تولایی، سیمین؛ رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ زنگانه، احمد، خزائی‌نژاد، فروغ، (1395) زیست پذیری شهری: مفهوم، اصول، ابعاد و شاخص‌ها، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های جغرافیای برنامه‌ریزی شهری، سال 4، شماره 1، صص. 50- 27.
  11. قنبری، محمد (1396) زیست پذیری، رهیافتی نوین در برنامه‌ریزی شهری مطالعه موردی: کلان‌شهر مشهد، رساله دوره دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری.
  12. علیزاده، سجاد (۱۳۹۳) سنجش عوامل زیست پذیری با تأکید بر رویکرد مشارکت (مطالعه موردی محله بریانک منطقه 1 شهرداری تهران)، پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد به راهنمایی دکتر واراز مرادی مسیحی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تهران مرکزی.
  13. عیسی لو، علی‌اصغر؛ مصطفی، بیات؛ عبدالعلی، بهرامی (۱۳۹۳) انگاره زیست پذیری رهیافتی نوین جهت ارتقای کیفیت زندگی در جوامع روستایی (مطالعه موردی شهرستان قم، بخش کهک)، نشریه مسکن محیط و روستا، سال 33، شماره ۱۴۶، صص.120-107.
  14. مهره کش، ریحانه؛ صابری، حمید؛ مؤمنی، مهدی؛ اذانی، مهری (1398) تبیین عوامل مؤثر کالبدی بر میزان زیست پذیری مناطق شهری (مطالعه موردی: مناطق شهر اصفهان)، پژوهش‌های جغرافیایی برنامه‌ریزی شهری، سال 7، شماره 2، صص. 429- 411.
  15. کرمی، تاج‌الدین (1390) نابرابری فضایی در فرایند گسترش کالبدی شهر (مورد: شهر تهران)، رساله دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده علوم جغرافیایی دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران.
  16. Alizadeh, Sajjad. (2014) Assessing livability factors with emphasis on participation approach (Case study of Bryanak neighborhood, District 1, Tehran Municipality), Master Thesis under the guidance of Dr. Varaz Moradi Masihi, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch. [in Persian].
  17. Bandar Abad, Alireza. (2011) A livable city from basics to meaning, first edition, Tehran, Azarakhsh Publications. [in Persian].
  18. Bandarabad, Alireza. & Ahmadinejad, Fereshteh. (2014) Assessment of quality of life with emphasis on the principles of habitable cities in the region 22 of Tehran, Journal of Urban Research and Planning, Vol.5, No.16, pp.55-74. [in Persian].
  19. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. (2009) Go To 2040, Retrieved from.
  20. Cowan, R. (2005) the dictionary of urbanism, streetwise press.
  21. & Schinkel. (2010) A System Approach to Livability and Sustainability: Defining Terms and Mapping Relationships to Link Desires with Ecological Oppurtunities and Constraints, Systems Research and Behavioral Science Syst, Vol.27, pp.585-597.
  22. Ghanbari, Mohammad. (2017) Sustainability, a New Approach in Urban Planning Case Study: Mashhad Metropolis, PhD Thesis in Geography and Urban Planning, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Department of Geography and Urban Planning. [in Persian].
  23. Golkar, Kourosh. (2006) Liveliness in the city with the help of urban design, Shahrnegar Journal, Vol.7, No.39, pp.24-28. [in Persian].
  24. Habibi, Davood. & Qashqaei, Reza. & Farzad, Heidari. (2013) A look at the characteristics and criteria of a livable city, International Conference on Architectural Civil Engineering and Sustainable Urban Development, Tabriz: University of Tabriz. [in Persian].
  25. IsaLu, Ali Asghar. & Mustafa, Bayat. & Abdolali, Bahrami. (2014) The idea of livability is a new approach to improve the quality of life in rural communities (Case study of Qom city, Kahak section), Journal of Environment and Rural Housing, Vol.33, No.146, pp.120-107. [in Persian].
  26. Karami, ‌Tajeddin. (2011) Spatial Inequality ‌In ‌Process ‌Physical Expansion ‌City (Case: ‌City Tehran), ‌The journal ‌Doctor of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geographical Sciences University University. [in Persian].
  27. Kashef, M. (2016) Urban Livability across disciplinary and professional boundaries, Frontiers of Architectural Research, Vol.5, No.2, pp.239-253.
  28. Khorasani, Mohammad Amin. & Rezvani, Mohammad Reza. (2013) Recognition and analysis of biodiversity differences in suburban villages in Varamin city, Journal of Space and Rural Development, Vol.2, No.2, pp.55-73. [in Persian].
  29. Khorasani, Mohammad Hossein. (2014) Living Habitat, Sustainable Habitat, Iranian Conference on Geographical Sciences, Tehran, University of Tehran. [in Persian].
  30. M. & Zarqhamfard, M. (2016) Analyzing the Impacts of Spatial Factors on Livability of Peri-Urban Villages Social Indicators Research An International and Interdisciplinary”, Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Vol. 136, No.2, pp.693-717.
  31. Larice, Michael. (2005) Great Neighborhoods: The Livability and morphology of High density neighborhoods in Urban North America, Doctor of Philosophy in City and Regional Planning, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY.
  32. Lowe, M. & Whitzman, C. & Badland, H.M. & Davern, M. & Hes, D. & Aye, L. Butterworth, I. & Giles-Corti, B. (2013) Liveable, Healthy, and Sustainable: What are the Key Indicators for Melbourne Neighbourhoods? McCaughey VicHealth Centre for Community Wellbeing, Melbourne University.
  33. Matthias Ruth. & Rachel S, Franklin. (2013) livability for all? conceptual limits and practical implications, Journal Applied Geography, Vol.14, pp.18-23.
  34. Michael, Southworthlau. & Hashim, Ahmad Hariza. (2010) livability dimensions and attributes: their relative important the eyes of neighborhood residents, journal of construction in developing countries.
  35. Mohrekesh, Reyhaneh. & Saberi, Hamid. & Mahdi Momeni. & Mehri Azani. (2019) Explaining the Effective Factors on Livability of Urban Areas of Isfahan, Geographical Urban Planning Research, Vol.7, No.2, pp.429-411. [in Persian].
  36. National research council. (2002) Community and quality of life. Data needs for informed decision making, Washington: National academy press.
  37. Newton, Peter. (2012) Liveable and Sustainable? Socio-Technical Challenges for Twenty-first-Century Cities, Journal of Urban Technology,Vol.19, pp.81-102.
  38. Perogordo Madrid, D. (2007) the Silesia Mega polis, European Spatial Planning. Salzano, E, seven aims for the livable city international making cities livable conferences, California, USA: Gondolier press.
  39. Rahnama, Mohammad Rahim. & Ghanbari, Mohammad. & Mohammadi Hamidi, Somayeh. & Hosseini, Seyed Mostafa. (2019) Evaluation and measurement of viability in Ahvaz metropolis, Journal Sustainable City, Vol.2, No.2, pp.1-17. [in Persian].
  40. Sasanpour, Farzaneh. & Toulaei, Simin. & Jafari Asadabadi, Hamzeh. (2015) Study of Urban Livability in Twenty-two Districts of Tehran Metropolitan, Quarterly Quarterly, Vol 5, No 18, pp: 27-42. [in Persian].
  41. Soleimani Mehrnjabi, Mohammad. & Tulai, Simin. & Rafieian, Mojtaba. & Zanganeh, Ahmad. & Khazaeinejad, Forough. (2016) Urban lviability: the Concept, Principles, aspects and parameters, Journal of Geographical Urban Planning Research, Vol.4, No.1, pp.27-50. [in Persian].
  42. Tardast, Zahra. & Nikseresht, Mehdi. & Meshkini, Abolfazl. (2019) Explaining the Pattern spatial organization of Urban livability: Case Study: Ilam City, Journal of Urban Structures and Function Studies, Vol.6, No.20, pp.105-125. [in Persian].
  43. The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2015) A Summary of the Liveability Ranking and Overview, London, England.
  44. Van Dorst, M. (2010) Sustainable liveability: Privacy zoning as a physical condition for social sustainability, in Environment, health, and sustainable development, A. Abdel-Hadi, M. Tolba, and S. Soliman, Editors, Hogrefe Publishing: Cambridge, MA. pp.111-125.
  45. VanZerr, M. & Seskin, S. (2011) Recommendations Memo Livability and Quality of Life Indicators, Least Cost Planning Working Group and Least Cost Planning Projects Management Team.