ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Ziari   K. (*1)
Sarraf   M. (2)
Poorahmad   A. (1)
Farhoudi   R. (1)






(*1) Department of Urban Geography, Faculty of Geography, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran
(2) Department of Behavioral Social Sciences, Kish International Campus, University of Tehran, Kish, Iran

Correspondence

Address: Floor 5, No 1, Faculty of Geography, Azin Alley, Vesal Street, Tehran, Iran. Postal Code:1417853933
Phone: +98 (21) 61113368
Fax: +98 (21) 61113368
zayyari@ut.ac.ir

Article History

Received:  November  16, 2020
Accepted:  January 14, 2021
ePublished:  June 16, 2021

BRIEF TEXT


Considering the importance of children and their lives, it is essential to prepare a proper and safe urban environment for them.

Kiani & Esmail zadeh (2012) carried out a study to make an explanation of a child-friendly city using children's opinions. Clearly, they concluded that the green space and playgrounds are of more importance in functional and environmental dimensions. Designing child-friendly cities are mainly in order to form and modify the surrounding environment to provide more opportunities for children [Kamelnia & Hagir, 2009]. A child-friendly city is a place that children can live in peace and they can explore their environment without any problem [Driksel, 2008].

This study aimed to explain an optimal and local structure for a child-friendly city in order to improve the urban space quality and provide some indicators to evaluate child-friendly cities.

This is an analytical-descriptive study that is empirical-developmental in terms of its aim.

The current research is carried out on families living in District 2 of Tehran.

The data are collected using a simple random sampling method from 384 samples.

The needed data were collected via questionnaires and were analyzed using SPSS software and the Delphi method.

Five main systems and two sub-systems of urban planning, as well as 14 factors, were extracted from theoretical and experiential foundations from experts' panel point of view in the first step. In the first run of Delphi, 10 out of 14 factors were selected as the factors with high and very high impact on the explanation of a child-friendly city with the attitude toward the improvement of urban space. The results are presented in the following table in detail. Buildings quality, granulation, urban blocks permeability, and income were dropped from the Delphi process because their importance was lower than 2.5.In the next step, all factors extracted from theoretical foundations were studied by the experts' panel for the second time. The experts selected 10 out of 10 factors as the factors with high and very high (the average bigger than 2.5) in the inefficient neighborhoods. The results of the questionnaires are presented in the following table. Kendall's coefficient of concordance for the answers of the members about the order of nine factors with high and very high impact was 0.765.The results of the third run of the Delphi method show that panel members reached an agreement because of the following resons:1. In the second run, more than 50% of the members selected 10 factors affecting the explanation of a child-friendly city. 2. The standard deviation of members' answers was much lower in the third run in comparison to the first and second runs. 3. Kendall's coefficient of concordance for the members' answers about the order of the factors was 0.790 in the third run. As the panel members were more than 10 people, this amount is significant. 4. Kendall's coefficient of concordance for the order of nine factors in the explanation of a child-friendly city was increased by just 0.025 which shows an insignificant growth. 5. According to the elite opinion activity and land use, entertaining environment quality, and access to the green space and nature resorts received the highest scores that show they are the most influential factors in the improvement of the urban areas. According to the zoning and blocking of district 2, 84 urban blocks were classified into four groups of friendly, almost friendly, unfriendly, and almost unfriendly.Evaluation according to the system of movement and access Heavy traffic is the most important indicator of the transportation dimension. Public transport vehicle quality and their access to other urban areas, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks are some of the factors that can be used in the analysis of each region's zoning. Evaluation according to the activity and land use factor A zoning map is prepared according to the access to proper educational, sports, sanitation, and commercial land uses per capita, proper playgrounds for kids to play, various toys, and flexible environments for kids to play, kids' own opinion, and teaching to children. Evaluation according to the urban landscape (intellectual) Safety and security factors are of great importance in a child-friendly city. To design a pattern for a child-friendly city, entertaining environments are the most effective factors. Considering drivers' speed, pedestrians' and bicycle riders' convenience, public supervision on the routes and public spaces, and kids' activities as the main factors of safety and security zoning can be done. Evaluation of the environmental system Nature resorts in pristine and artificial environments, green spaces such as parks, and urban landscape quality improves the environmental sanitation. Children are more sensitive because of their vulnerability. Considering the proper allocation of space to the parks and green space, convenient location of them, and on-time collection of the garbage are some of the factors in this system.

The result of the current study is consistent with the results of Howard (2006) on the indicators of a child-friendly city, Gleeson et al. (2007) about the nature resorts importance in a child-friendly city, and Bidarigh-Mehr (2016) about the explanation of the indicators of a child-friendly city.

It is suggested to analyze the impact of each variable in pairs in order to be able to rank the indicators from the most to the least important factors. It helps the policy-makers to make proper strategies at the urban regions level.

One of the limitations in such studies is the lack of enough recorded statistics. Statistics are not up-to-date sometimes and some of the needed information is not recorded. Moreover, field studies are needed to evaluate the accuracy of the recorded statistics.

The analytical results show that child-unfriendly zones are located in the central and southern parts and they are densely located in northern parts of district 2. This map represents a severe shortage of child-friendly structures in urban environments that might be harmful to children. Southern parts of district 2 are very dense and there is no chance to renovate the neighborhood. To sum up, 2, 4, and 9 blocks are friendly, and almost friendly blocks, while 3, 6, and 7 blocks are unfriendly and almost unfriendly blocks. Texture, convenience, and land use on a large scale can affect the life quality on a small scale.

None.

None.

None.

None.

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Aalizadeh A, Fakhrayi M, Keyghobadi M (2013). A look at futures research methods: Introducing sixbi important and widely used techniques in futures research. Tehran: Ayande Pajouh Publisher. pp. 85-90. [Persian]
[2]Aarts M J, Jeurissen M, van Oers HA, SchuitbdIen A J, van de Goora L E (2011). Multi-sector policy action to create activity-friendly environments for children: A multiple case study. Journal of Health Policy. 101(1):11- 19.
[3]Bidarigh Mehr Z, Mohabbati Saf Serri Z (2016). Child-friendly city indicators. Proceedings of the 1st scientific research conference on civil engineering, architecture and sustainable environment. [Persian]
[4]Christensen PI, O’Brien MA (2002). Children in the City: Home, Neighbourhood and Community. London: Routledge Falmer. pp. 66-81.
[5]Dryksel, DA (2008). Creating better cities with children and adolescents, a guide to participation and collaborative research. Tavakoli M, Saeedi Rezvani N, translators. Tehran: Dibayeh Publisher. [Persian]
[6]Gill T (2019). Designing cities for outdoor play. Encyclopedia on early childhood development. 1-4.
[7]Gleeson B J, Woolcock G W (2007). Child Friendly Cities: Criticaly Exploring thr evidence base of a resurgent agenda. Proceedings of the State of Austrailian Cities Confrence 2007.
[8]Goldfeld Sh, Villanueva K, Tanton R, Katz I, Brinkman S, Giles-Corti B, Woolcock G (2019). Creating community indicators for early childhood development: challenges and innovations from the kids in community’s study. Cities & Health Journal. 3(1-2):68-77.
[9]Habibi E, Ezatian Sh, Mohaghegh Nasab E (2018). Lessons for children's participation in the process of designing a child-friendly urban space (Case study: Sade Lanjan City). Urban Studies Journal. 29:111-120. [Persian]
[10]Howard A (2006). What Constitutes Child Friendly Communities and how are they built? report prepared for the Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY), Perth.
[11]Imani B, YarMohammadi K, YarMohammadi K (2017). Survey of a child-friendly city from the perspective of children Case study: District one of Ardabil city. Journal of Geography and Environmental Studies. 6(21):7-22. [Persian]
[12]Kamelnia H, Haghir S (2009). Design patterns of green space in CFC. (Case study: Child friendly city of Bam). Baghe Nazar Journal. 12(6):77-88. [Persian]
[13]Karbalaei Hoseini Ghiasvand A, Soheily J (2013). Explore the features of a lovely city from a children's point of view Case study: District two of Qazvin municipality. Journal of Urban Studies. 9:59-69. [Persian]
[14]Kharazmi O A, Johari L, Kharazmi A A (2019). Assessing the child friendly city indicators in Mashhad metropolis. Journal of Urban Social Geography. 7(1):191-210. [Persian]
[15]Kiani A, Esmailzade Kuaki A (2012). Planning child-friendly city (CFC) from children’s perspective, Case study: Quchan. Baghe Nazar Journal. 9(20):51-62. [Persian]
[16]Manuchehri B, Alizadeh K (2013). Child-friendly city, a step towards a sustainable city of the future (Case study: Mashhad). Proceedings of the 1st national conference in search of the city of tomorrow Analysis of concepts and examples in the Islamic city of Iran. [Persian]
[17]Nordstrom M (2009). Children’s view on child friendly environments in different geographical, cultural and social neighbourhoods. Urban studies. 47(3): 514- 528.
[18]Qarabeyglu M (2012). The role of environmental effects on developing creativity in children. Manzar Journal. 4(19):86-91. [Persian]
[19]Rastegar A, Bunfantini B (2016). Child-friendly urban design guideline. Urban Management Journal. 44:65-90. [Persian]
[20]Riggio E (2002). Child friendly cities. Good governance in the best interests of the child. Journal of Environment and Urbanization. 14(2): 45-58.
[21]United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (2017). A world free from child poverty. A guide to the tasks to achieve the vision.
[22]Woolcock GE, Steele WE (2008). Child-friendly community indicators. A literature review. Urban Research Program.
[23]Zarei F, Ahani S, Salehi S (2014). Assessment of child-centered neighborhood in traditional and new fabric with emphasis on qualitative factors, case study: Sanandaj. Armanshahr Architecture and Urban Planning Journal. 21:223-236. [Persian]
[24]Norodahl K, Johannesson I A (2015). Children’s outdoor environment in icelandic educational policy. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. 59(1):1-23.