Explaining the Conceptual Model of Knowledge-Based Urban Development Based on Interpretive Structural Modeling Approach Case Study: Tehran Metropolis

Document Type : Article extracted From phd dissertation


1 PhD Student, of Urban Planning, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor of Urban Planning, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor of Urban Planning, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran



Extended Abstract
Recently, studies show that in Iran, measures have been taken to achieve knowledge-based development, but due to lack of understanding of the concept of knowledge assets and its resources, the nature of knowledge development and its pattern is not clear. There is no written plan to move towards the urban development of knowledge-based people, and in the meantime, Tehran metropolis is facing major challenges in achieving the development of knowledge-based people, in fact due to the lack of formal institutions specific action plans, knowledge-based urban development with the efficiency of a specific legal agenda, has never had an executive guarantee. On the other hand, considering the effects of the knowledge period on the spatial structure of Tehran and taking advantage of the opportunities of the knowledge period and knowledge economy in the development process of Tehran and coordination with the global trend, the need to address how to establish knowledge-based urban development in Tehran city justifies. In view of the above, the main problem of research is neglect and insufficient attention to the main driving engine such as knowledge as value-creating capital and attention to knowledge-based urban development as an alternative to contemporary urban development through capacity measurement to create knowledge, innovation and creativity in order to achieve the city of knowledge. According to what has been said, the main purpose of the research is to present a conceptual model of explaining the knowledge-based urban development in Tehran, based on the interpretive structural modeling approach.
This research is applied-developmental in terms of purpose and in terms of method is in the category of descriptive-analytical research. Data collection is based on documentary studies and also in the form of content analysis and specialized interviews with experts (Delphi). The data collection tool is a questionnaire that creates the ISM method for purposeful sampling. The statistical population includes professors and PhD students in urban planning of the University of Science and Technology, Research Sciences and North Tehran, of which a sample of 20 is considered. To assess the validity of the extracted indices, the Delphi technique was used. For this purpose, a questionnaire with 18 proportional indices was designed and the panel members were asked to vote on the appropriateness of the appropriate components with Tehran city based on the Likert scale. The results were analyzed by SPSS software which based on this, finally 11 components have an average higher than 3.
Results and discussion
After identifying the main and effective components on the knowledge-based urban development based on content analysis, 11 components have been selected based on the Delphi technique appropriate to Tehran metropolis. The modeling process includes steps as following:
1-Formation of structural self-interaction matrix, in this step, experts were asked to examine the relationship between the components in pairs.
2-Formation of access matrix, the initial access matrix is obtained by converting the self-interactive structural matrix into a dual value matrix (zero-one).
3-Leveling and modeling the factors affecting the urban development of Tehran metropolitan scholars, in the ISM graph, the interrelationships and influence between the components and the relationship of the components of different levels are visible.
This model is designed in four levels and three layers. The first layer (fourth level) is related to the basic factors of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran metropolis, which includes human capital, place of knowledge and human knowledge. The second layer includes the structural features of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran metropolis, which includes the components of the third and second levels. The third level includes the components of knowledge-based economy, knowledge management and quality of physical environment and urban activities. The second level includes technology and communication, knowledge interaction and exchange, infrastructure, cultural capital and social capital, and finally the third layer is the goal of knowledge-based urban development, which includes the first level component of achieving a sustainable and quality place to live.
This research provides a new insight and knowledge of the nature of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran metropolis, which identifies the priorities for action in the decision-making space. Factors affecting the future of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran metropolis are classified into four levels. In the ISM graph, the interrelationships and influence between the components and the relationship of the components of different levels are visible, which leads to a better understanding of the decision-making space. The results of the article show that in terms of penetration power, the two components of human capital and human knowledge with the influence of 10 and 9, respectively, have the highest influence and impact, and are considered as stimulus or motivator of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran. In contrast, the component of environmental sustainability with a power level of 1 has the least influence on achieving knowledge-based urban development in Tehran. Also, the two components of social capital and knowledge interaction and exchange with a rate of 9 have the highest dependence on other components. In other words, many factors are involved in creating and promoting these components, and they can be less likely to change and influence the achievement of knowledge-based urban development in Tehran metropolis. On the other hand, a review of the results obtained from other researchers also confirms the accuracy and correctness of the research’s results and the following can be summarized in the form of suggestions:
1: Knowledge-based culture, 2: Knowledge market 3: Knowledge-Based management, 4: Knowledge-Based activities, 5: Development of innovation centers and other necessary institutions, 6: Entrepreneurial university, 7: Continuous innovation, 8: Consider startups and role of science and technology parks in the upstream documents. 9: Realize entrepreneurial governance.


  1. علی‌اکبری، اسماعیل و اکبری، مجید (1396) مدل‌سازی ساختاری تفسیری عوامل مؤثر بر زیست پذیری کلان‌شهر تهران، برنامه‌ریزی و آمایش فضا، دوره 21، شماره 1، صص. 31-1.
  2. علی‌اکبری، اسماعیل و اکبری، مجید (1398) توسعه شهری دانش‌بنیان تدوین نقشه راهبردی کلان‌شهر تهران، پژوهش‌های جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دوره 7، شماره 1، صص.170-151.
  3. عظیمی، مریم؛ رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ زرآبای، زهرا سادات سعیده (1398) تبیین مدل تفسیری- ساختاری مؤثر بر بازآفرینی محله‌ها، با تأکید بر فضاهای عمومی هم پیوند، مطالعات محیطی هفت حصار، دوره 8، شماره 30، صص. 95-85.
  4. مرکز آمار ایران، 1395، سرشماری نفوس و مسکن 1395.
  5. سایت دفتر ریاست جمهوری isti.ir.com
  6. Aghion, Philippe. & Howitt, Robert. (1998) Endogenous Growth Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge.
  7. Ali Akbarai, Esmaeil. & Akbari, Majid. (2017) Interpretive-Structural Modeling of the Factors that Affect the Viability of Tehran Metropolis, The Journal of Spatial Planning, Vol.21, No.1, pp.1-31, [in Persian].
  8.  Ali Akbarai, Esmaeil. & Akbari, Majid. (2019) Knowledge Based Urban Development; Development of Strategic Map of Tehran Metropolis, Geographical Urban Planning Research, Vol.7, No.1, pp.151-170. [in Persian].
  9. Alrauof, Ali. (2018) the Inevitability of KBUD in the Middle East, Book. Qatar.
  10. Attri, Rajesh. & Dev, Nikhil. & Sharma, Vivek. (2013) Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) approach: An Overview Research, Journal of Management Sciences, Vol.2, No.2, pp.3-8.
  11. Ayman Mohammed, Mostafa. & Khaled Youssef, Mohameda. (2016) An approach for promoting urban and architectural potentials for supporting knowledge economy, case study: Brisbane, Urban Planning and Architecture Design for Sustainable Development, Vol.216, No.2, pp.20-29.
  12. Azimi, Maryam. & Rafieian, Mojtaba. & Zarabadi, Zahrasadat. (2020) Urban neighborhood regeneration; Interpretive structural modeling of the factors affecting connected public spaces, Haft Hesar: Journal of Enviromental Studies, Vol.8, No.30, pp. 85-95, [in Persian].
  13. Baum, Scott. & Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Horton, Stephen. & Velibeyoglu, Koray. & Gleeson, Brendan. (2006) The Role of Community and Lifestyle in the Making of a Knowledge City, Report, Griffith University, Brisbane, pp.20-23.
  14. Becker, Gary S. (1994) Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  15. Callon, M. (1991) Techno-economic networks and irreversibility, in Law, J. (Ed), Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, Routledge, London.
  16. Carrillo, Francisco Javier. (2014) What knowledge-based stands for? A position paper, International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Vol.5, No.4, pp.402-421.
  17. Chang, Daniel Lage. & Sabatini-Marques, Jamile. & da Costa, Eduardo. (2018) Knowledge-based, smart and sustainable cities: a provocation for a conceptual framework, Journal of Open Innovation, Vol.4, No.5, pp.1-17. 
  18. Chidambaranathan, subramanian. & Muralidharan, C. & Deshmukh, S. (2009) Analysing the Interaction of Critical Factors of Supplier Development Using Interpretive Structural Modeling and Empirical Study, The international Jornal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol.43, No.11, pp.1081-1093.
  19. Dubey, Rameshwar. &  Sadia, Ali. (2014) Identification of Flexible Manufacturing System Dimension and Their Interrelationship Using Total Interpertive Structural Modelling and Fuzzy MICMAC Analysis, Global Journal of Flexible System Management, Vol.15, No.2, pp.131-143.
  20. Elena, Cigu. (2015) The making of Knowledge, cities in Romania, procedia Economics anad Finance, 32, No.22, pp.534-541
  21. Ergazakis, Konstantinos. & Metaxiotis, Kostas. & Psarras, John. (2006) Knowledge cities: The answer to the needs of knowledge-based development, knowledge cities, Vol.36, No.1, pp.67–84.
  22. Ergazakis, Konstantinos. & Metaxiotis, Kostas. & Psarras, John. (2004) Towards knowledge cities: conceptual analysis and success stories, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.8, pp.5–15.
  23. Ergazakis, Kostas. & Metaxiotis, Kostas. (2011) The knowledge-based development agenda: A perspective for 2010-2020. VINE, The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management, Vol.41, No.3, pp.358–377.
  24. Esmaeilpoorarabi, Niusha. & Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Guaralda, Mirko. & Kamruzzaman, MD. (2018) Evaluating place quality in innovation districts: A Delphic hierarchy process approach, Land Use Policy, Elsevier, Vol.76, No.3, pp.471-486.
  25. Faludi, Andreas. (1986) Towards a theory of strategic planning. Journal of Housing and Environmental Research, Vol.1, No.1, pp.253-268.
  26. Fitjar, Rune Dahl. & Timmermans, Bram. (2020) Knowledge bases and relatedness. A study of labour mobility in Norwegian regions. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New Avenues for regional innovation systems - theoretical Advances, empirical cases and policy Lessons, New York.
  27. Florida, Richard. (2005) The Flight of the Creative Class: The New Global Competition for Talent, Harper Collins, London.
  28. Graham, Stephen. & Healey, Patsy. (1999) Relational concepts of space and place, European Planning Studies, Vol.7, No.1, pp.623-646.
  29. Kacar, Sinem Metin. & Gezici, Ferhan. (2016) Knowledge-based urban development potential of Turkish provinces, International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Vol.7, No.2, pp.160-183.
  30. Knight, R. (1995) Knowledge-based development: policy and planning implications for cities, Urban Studies, Vol.32, No.2, pp.29-52.
  31. Maldonado, Fernandez. & Romein, A. (2010) The role of organisational capacity and knowledgebased development, International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Vol.1, No.1/2, pp.79–96.
  32. Ovalle, del Rosario González. & Márquez, M., J.A. Alvarado. & Salomón S D, Martínez. (2004) A compilation of resources on knowledge cities and knowledge based development, Journal of Knowledge Managementp, Vol.8, No.5, pp.107-127.
  33. Pancholi, Surabhi. & Guaralda, Mirko. & Yigitcanlar, Tan. (2017) Context, contribution and characteristics of public spaces for place making in contemporary knowledge and innovation spaces, Observations from Brisbane, Australia, The Journal of Public Space, Vol.2, No.4, pp. 91-102.
  34. Pancholi, Surabhi. & Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Guaralda, Mirko. (2015) Public space design of knowledge and innovation spaces: Learnings from Kelvin Grove Urban Village, Brisbane, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, Vol.1, No.13, pp.1-17.
  35. Perry, Beth. (2008) Academic Knowledge and Urban Development: Theory, Policy, and Practice, In Yigitcanlar T, Velibeyoglu K and Baum S (Eds), Knowledge­Based Urban Development: Planning and Applications in the Information Era, Information Science Reference.
  36. Rittgasszer, ImolaI. (2013) Knowledge-Based Urban Development, as a New Development Paradigm.
  37. Romer, Paul. (1986) Increasing returns and long-run growth, Journal of Political Economy, Vol.94, No.1, pp.1002-1037.
  38. Salisbury, Robert. (1969) An exchange theory of interest groups, Midwest Journal Political Science, Vol.13, No.1, pp.1-32.
  39. Sarimin, Muna. & Yigitcanlar, Tan. (2012) Towards a comprehensive and integrated knowledge-based urban development model: Status quo and directions. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Vol.3, No.2, pp.175-192.
  40. Sarimin, Muna.Yigitcanlar, Tan.Parker, Rachel. (2010) Towards a unified method for the knowledge based urban development framework. in the: 3rd Knowledge Cities World, From Theory to Practice. World Capital Institute, City of Melbourne and Office of Knowledge Capital, Australia, pp. 324-339.
  41. Statistics Center of Iran. (2016), Population and Housing Census 2016, [in Persian].
  42. Stoker, G. (1998) Governance as theory, International Journal Social Science, Vol.50, No.1, pp.17-28.
  43. United Nations (UN) (1987) Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  44. Warfieled, John. (1973) Social systems:planning policy and complexity, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  45. Website of the Office of the President, www. isti.ir. com, [in Persian].
  46. World Bank. (1996) World Development Report: Knowledge forDevelopment, Oxford UniversityPress, New York, NY.
  47. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Bulu, Melih. (2015) Dubaization of Istanbul: Insights from the knowledge-based urban development journey of an emerging local economy, Environment and Planning, Vol.47, No.1, pp.89–107.
  48. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Edvardsson, Ingi Runar. & Johannesson, Hjalti. & Kamruzzaman, MD. & Ioppolo, Giuseppe. & Pancholi, Surabhi. (2017) Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: Insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns, European Planning Studies, Vol.25, No.12, pp.2272–2292.
  49. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Inkinen, Tommi. (2019) Geographies of disruption. Place making of innovation in the age of knowledge economy, springer, book.
  50. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Kamruzzaman, MD. (2018) Does smart city policy lead to sustainability of cities? Land Use Policy, ELSEVIER, Vol.73, pp. 49-58.
  51. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Lee, Shinyi. (2009) Moving towards a Knowledge City : Brisbanes Knowledge Based Urban Development Experience.
  52. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Lönnqvist, A. & Salonius, H. (2014). Analysis of a city-region from the knowledge perspective: Tampere, Finland, Vol.44, No.3, pp.445-466
  53. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Lonnqvist, Antti. (2013) Benchmarking Knowledge-Based Urban Development Performance: Results from the International Comparison of Helsinki, Cities (London, England), Vol.31, No.1, pp.357–369.
  54. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Metaxiotis, Kostas. & Carrillo, Francisco (Eds). (2012) Building prosperous knowledge cities: Policies, plans and metrics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  55. Yigitcanlar, Tan. & Sarimin, Muna. (2015) Multimedia super corridor, Malaysia: Knowledge-based urban development lessons from an emerging economy, Journal of Information and Knowledge Management, Vol.45, No.1, pp.126–147.
  56. Yigitcanlar, Tan. (2010a) Making space end place for the knowledge economy: Knowledge-based development of Australian cities, European Planning Studies, Vol.18, No.11, pp.1769–1786.
  57. Yigitcanlar, Tan. (2011) Knowledge-based urban development processes of an emerging knowledge city, Brisbane, Australia, A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, Vol.8, No.1, pp.53- 67.