توسعه اجتماع محلي با بهره‌گيري از ظرفيت‌هاي مشاركتي در رويكرد دارايي‌مبنا (مطالعه موردي: محله امامزاده حسن، منطقه 17 تهران)

Developing local community by benefiting from participatory capacities in asset-based approach (Case study: Imamzadeh Hassan neighborhood, district 17, Tehran)

در اين مقاله پس از معرفي رويكرد توسعه دارايي‌مبنا به تحليل رابطه سرمايه اجتماعي (به‌عنوان مهم‌ترين دارايي در سطح اجتماع محلي)، عوامل اجتماعي-كالبدي و تمايل به مشاركت سازمان‌يافته (به‌عنوان پيش‌نياز ضروري رويكرد دارايي‌مبنا) مي‌پردازيم. شاخص‌هاي مورد بررسي را از مطالعات و تجربيات داخلي و جهاني استخراج كرده و با روش پيمايش، در محله امامزاده حسن شهر تهران مورد سنجش قرار داده‌ايم. نتايج رگرسيون چند‌متغيره و تحليل مسير تمايل به مشاركت سازمان‌يافته، سرمايه اجتماعي و عوامل اجتماعي- كالبدي نشان مي‌دهد سرمايه اجتماعي (با ضريب 0.484) بر تمايل به مشاركت تاثير مستقيم و افزاينده دارد. همچنين، قدمت سكونت (با ضريب 0.256)، ميزان كيفيت امكانات كالبدي از ديد ساكنان (با ضريب 0.333) و ميزان حضور‌پذيري فضاهاي عمومي در محله (با ضريب 0.354) با واسطه سرمايه اجتماعي بر تمايل به مشاركت سازمان‌يافته تاثير افزاينده دارند و تاثير وضعيت مالكيت (0.058) نسبت به سه عامل ديگر كمتر است. اين نتايج نشان مي‌دهد سرمايه كالبدي براي افزايش سرمايه اجتماعي داراي اهميت ابزاري است و در رويكرد دارايي‌مبنا براي توسعه اجتماع محلي بايد به سرمايه‌هاي كالبدي و اجتماعي به‌صورت يكپارچه براي ظرفيت‌سازي توجه كرد.

Along with the increasing growth of urbanization during recent decades, “micro viewpoint” has substituted “macro viewpoint” and according to this standpoint, development commences from the very smallest urban unit that is “Community”. Community development has two main approaches: one is “need-based approach” which is influenced by entitlement policy and believes in technical values and the other is “asset-based approach” that implies on local capitals, residents’ participation and capacity building. Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD), as an alternative approach to community development, starts with what is present in a community, the tangible and intangible assets available, rather than with what is deficient in a community and what a community’s needs are. This approach is one strategy which is internally focused and relationship driven. Community assets mainly include social capital and physical capital. Social capital as an important part of local capacity, can be used by individuals and groups to facilitate their accessibility to local resources. Participation in social networks, norms and social trust are the key concepts in social capital. Also physical capital (buildings, roads, open and public spaces) which makes up the most visible and formal part of a community’s fabric, is essential to the success of community development process. In this article, the relation between social capital (as the most important asset in local community level), social-physical factors and organized participation tendency (necessary pre-requisite of asset-based approach) is analyzed after introducing asset-based community development approach. The studied indicators are extracted from domestic and international studies and experiences and are measured through survey and random sampling in Imamzadeh Hassan neighborhood. The results of multiple regression and path analysis for organized participation tendency, social capital and socialphysical factors indicate that social capital (0.484) has direct and increasing effect on organized participation tendency. Also, the antiquity of residence (0.256), quality of physical facilities from the residents’ viewpoint (0.333) and the rate of referring to public places in the neighborhood (0.354) mediated by social capital have increasing effect on organized participation tendency and the effect of ownership situation (0.058) is lower than the other three factors. These results confirm the importance of both social and physical capital for capacity building in Asset-Based Community Development approach and also indicate that physical capital has instrumental importance to increase social capital in order to develop local community; So physical and social capitals shall be considered integrated to have capacity building provided.