كليدواژه :
سرمايه اجتماعي , محلات تاريخي , محيط كالبدي , محيط اجتماعي , ايران
چكيده فارسي :
حوزه‌هاي مختلف علوم، با طرح مفاهيمي مانند سرمايۀ اجتماعي در پي بيان ملموس و تحليل‌پذير پديده‌هاي غامض اجتماعي هستند. يكي از كاركردهاي متنوع سرمايۀ اجتماعي، در سطح محلات و حوزۀ سكونت بوده و تلاش براي حفظ و يا افزايش آن، راهكاري براي مقابله با برخي ناهنجاري‌ها و معضلات اجتماعي محلات، دانسته شده است. محلات تاريخي ايران، واجد الگوهايي كالبدي و نيز قالب‌هاي اجتماعي تائيد شده و مشخصي هستند. اين پژوهش، از يك سو، مفهوم سرمايۀ اجتماعي را بر اساس مدلي به بحث مي‌گذارد كه آن را در سه جزء رفتاري، شناختي، و روان‌شناسانه براي محلات مسكوني تعريف كرده است. از سوي ديگر، شاخص‌هايي براي محيط اجتماعي (نظام اداري، تركيب اجتماعي) و محيط كالبدي (تنوع و كاركرد اجزاء، تركيب و ساختار، معماري و طراحي اجزاء) محلات تاريخي طرح كرده است و درنهايت، با تكيه بر تحليل و اسناد به جستجوي رابطۀ ميان آن‌ها با مؤلفه‌هاي سرمايۀ اجتماعي در مدل مذكور، مي‌پردازد و در اين ميان، به مصاديقي عيني از محلات تاريخي نيز اشاراتي مي‌شود. بررسي‌ها ضمن تأكيد بر توجه به پيچيدگي مفهوم سرمايۀ اجتماعي، نشان دادند شاخص‌هاي محيط اجتماعي محلات تاريخي با جزء شناختي سرمايۀ اجتماعي (توانمندسازي و حس اجتماعي) رابطه دارند و مي‌توانند بر جزء رفتاري آن نيز اثرگذار باشند. شاخص‌هاي محيط كالبدي بر جزء رفتاري (همسايه داري)، روان‌شناسانه (تعلق به مكان)، و شناختي (حس اجتماعي) تأثيرگذار هستند، همچنين انطباق و همخواني محيط اجتماعي و محيط كالبدي محله، عاملي ضروري و مؤثر براي افزايش سرمايۀ اجتماعي ساكنان بوده است.
واژه‌هاي كليدي
چكيده لاتين :
The concept of social capital views the relationships and interactions of individuals, characterized by quality or quantity, as an asset, trying to use this asset to tackle problems in different areas. This concept is deemed a reliable measure, particularly in the residential neighborhoods context. This study discusses social capital in the form of a model for traditional communities of Iran and, by proposing indicators for social and built environment of the communities, explores their relationship with the components of social capital in the framework of a model of social capital, defined at community level and characterized by three cognitive, behavioral and psychological components. Social environment indicators include the administrative system (control and management, self-sufficiency) and the social composition, while the built environment indicators consist of diversity and function, composition and structure, architecture and design. Given the complexity of the concept of social capital and the fact that built environment does not directly create social capital, the study demonstrates that the control and management system of traditional communities is in accordance with the component of empowerment in the social capital model. On the other hand, the self-sufficiency of communities and their social composition affect the sense of community. In other words, social interactions increase by the consistency of demographic patterns and the self-sufficiency of communities, which means their ability to meet the daily and weekly needs of residents through their various functions. Along with the enhancement of social interactions, the sense of community is promoted and the component of neighboring among inhabitants is strengthened. Briefly, the social environment can affect the behavioral components of social capital (neighboring) in addition to its positive impact on both cognitive component of social capital (empowerment and sense of community). The built environment of communities possess a variety of components and functions. The diversity of functions led to the emergence of self-sufficient communities in terms of meeting the needs of inhabitants, while the function of components was beyond mere functional roles; they therefore sometimes played a social role (e.g. the mosque and neighborhood square) and provided a suitable basis for the active presence of residents at community level. In other words, the correct prediction of social needs of residents and appropriate responsiveness in the built environment provided the inhabitants with spaces necessary for their social activities at community level. On the other hand, the architecture and design of elements, precise prediction or embedment of components (frontispiece, hoods, etc.), selection of materials and creation of spatial qualities (dimensions, proportions, differences, etc.) are factors that increase social interactions and promote the residents’ sense of attachment to the community. At a higher level, the overall structure of community, composition of components, organization and location of functions such as house, passage and square are aimed to increase social interactions. Consequently, the built environment of communities specifically affect the sense of community (cognitive component), neighboring (behavioral component) and sense of attachment (psychological component) by: (1) increasing the level of social interaction, and (2) enhancing the sense of belonging to the community.
