تحلیل سطوح برخورداری و رتبه‌بندی شهرستان‌های استان همدان با استفاده از مدل-های چند معیاره TOPSIS و KOPRAS

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 کارشناس ارشد جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

3 کارشناس ارشد برنامه ریزی شهری، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

چکیده

     یکی از مسائل ساختاری نظام مدیریت و برنامه­ریزی کشور، مسأله تمرکز خدمات در مرکز و ضعف و نارسائی آن در پیرامون است که مسبب مسائل متعددی چون رشد بی­عدالتی و افزایش فقر در مناطق مختلف کشور می­باشد. هدف تحقیق حاضر، بررسی وضعیت خدمات عمومی و نحوه پراکنش آنها در شهرستان­های استان همدان است. روش پژوهش مبتنی بر روش توصیفی- تحلیلی می­باشد. داده­های مورد نیاز به شیوه کتابخانه­ای و اسنادی، و با بررسی 52 متغیر از سالنامه آماری سال 1392 استان همدان به دست آمده است. تحلیل داده­ها با استفاده از مدل­های تصمیم­گیری TOPSIS و KOPRAS، وزن دهی به روش آنتروپی و تکنیک تحلیل خوشه­ای انجام گرفته است. نتایج به دست آمده بیانگر عدم تعادل در توزیع خدمات در بین شهرستان­های استان همدان می­باشد. نظام برنامه­ریزی این استان تابعی از برنامه­ریزی مرکز- پیرامون است، به گونه­ای که اکثر خدمات در مرکز (همدان) واقع شده و هرچه فاصله از مرکز زیاد می­شود، سطح خدمات نیز کمتر می­شود. یافته­ها نشان می­دهد که شهرستان همدان با رتبه یک (با ضریب 600/0) و در سطح برخوردار از توسعه، شهرستان ملایر با رتبه 2 (با ضریب 310/0) در سطح نیمه برخوردار، شهرستان­های بهار (با ضریب 305/0)، نهاوند (با ضریب 266/0)، کبودرآهنگ (با ضریب 205/0)، تویسرکان (با ضریب 177/0) و رزن (با ضریب 176/0) و با رتبه­های 3 تا 7 درسطح محروم، و شهرستان­های اسدآباد (با ضریب 138/0) و فامنین (084/0) نیز با رتبه­های 8 و 9 در سطح بسیار محروم قرار دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating Development Levels and Ranking of Hamadan Province's Counties via TOPSIS and KOPRAS Models

نویسندگان [English]

  • hasan esmaeilzadeh 1
  • rezvan safarkhani 2
  • yaghob esmaeilzadeh 3
چکیده [English]

One of the structural problems in management and planning system of Iran is the problem of service centralization at the center and its weakness and insufficiency in the around, which caused different problems such as rise of injustice and increase poverty in the country. The aim of current research is to examine the status of public services and find the best way to distribute them in the counties of Hamadan province. The required data of this descriptive-analytic research are collected via librarian-attributive method and examined 52 variables from statistical yearbook of 2013 in Hamadan province. Analyzing information is done by using KOPRAS and TOPSIS decision-making models; weighting with the method of Entropy, and Cluster analysis technique. The results indicate unbalance in the distribution of services among counties of Hamadan province. The planning system of this province is a function of center-around planning, in such a way that the majority of services are located at the center (Hamadan) and as the distance from the center increases, the level of services will be decreased. The findings show that Hamadan county with score 1 (by factor of 0.600), is in the developed level, Malayer county with score 2(by factor of 0.310), is in the half-developed level, and Nahavand (by factor of 0.266), Tuiserkan (by factor of 0.177), Kabutarahang (by factor of 0.205), Razan (by factor of 0.176), and Bahar (by factor of 0.305) counties with scores 3 to 7, are in the deprived from development level, and Asadabad (by factor of 0.138) and Famenin (by factor of 0.084) with score 8 and 9, are in the more deprived level.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • development
  • Region
  • KOPRAS model
  • Topsis model
  • Hamadan

مراجع

  1. Asgarpour.  M , 2002, Multiple criteria dicision making, Tehran university Pablication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  2. Azime. N, 1999, Urbanization research and fundamentals urban system, Nika publication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  3. Brown. I,  Brown. I. R, 2003, Quality of life and disability and approach for community practitioners, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London and NewYork.
  4. Esmaeilzadeh. H, Kaffash. A, Heidary. S, Rooy del. J, 2014, Analysing spatial justice of transportation and relationship at geography of boundry provinces case study: north Khorasan province, geographical Journal of Sarzamin, Vol 46, Issue 2, Pp 45-60, Tehran. [In Persian].
  5. Friedmann. J, 1972, A General Theory of Polarized Development, in Hansen, N. M. (ed), Growth centers in Regional Economic Development, Macmillan Co.Ltd.
  6. Gaderi Hazat. M, Abde. A, Jalele Parvaneh. Z, Bagheri. N, 2010, Assessing of boundary marketing roles in development Surrounding area case study; boundary marketing in  South Khorasan province, Geopolitic Journal,Vol 6, Issue 3, Pp 121-151, Tehran. [In Persian].
  7. Ghanbari. A, 2013, Assessing of regional inequality in Iran, Research strategy studeis, Tehran.  [In Persian].
  8. Hatame Nejad. H, Farhode. R, Mohammad Pourjabre. M, 2008, Assessing of social inequality in functional urban services case study; Asfarayen city, Human geography Research Quarterly Journal, Tehran.  [In Persian].
  9. Hosein Zadeh Daler. K, 2006, Regional planning, Samt Publication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  10. Hytonen. M, 2003, Social Sustainability of Forestry in Northern Europe: Research and Education, Final Report of the Nordic Research Program on Social Sustainability of Forestry, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.
  11. Martnez. J, 2005, Monitors Intra-Urban Inequalities with GIS-Based Indicators: With a Case Study in Rosario, Argentina. Utrecht University.
  12. Papoli Yazdi. M.H, Rajabi Sanajerdi. H, 2010, The theory of urban and surrounding, Samt Publication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  13. Poortaheri. M, Hajinejad. A, Fatahi. A, Nemati. R, 2014, Physical vulnerability assessment of rural habitats against natural hazards earthquakes with a decision model KOPRAS case study Chalan Cholan villages Dorud township, The journal of spatial planning,Vol 18, Issue 3, Pp 29-52, Tehran. [In Persian].
  14. Rice, N, and Smith, P. 2001. Ethics and Geographical Equity in Health Care Utilization of New York, journal of Medical Ethics.
  15. Shakoei. H, 2003, New trends in philosophy of Geography, Volume1, Gitashenasi Publication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  16. Wheeler. James, Muller. Peter. 1986, Economic Geography, John, Wiley 8Sons, Inc, Canada.
  1. Dinpanah. G, 2014,  Assessing rural development level by using topsis technicues case study Aslandoz – ParsAbad,  Geography and planning journal, Issue 18, PP 175- 188, Tabriz University. [In Persian].
  1. Hakimi. H, Pourmohammadi. M, Parhizkar. A, Meshkini. A, Pourtaheri. M, 2013, The Role of Classical Development on Forming and Expansion of Informal Settlement (Case Study: Khoy), Geography and planning journal,  Vol 17, Issue 46, PP 25- 45, Tabriz University. [In Persian]. 
  1. Jomehpour. M, 2008, An introduction to rural development planning approaches and methods, Samt pablication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  2. Kiani. A, Fazelniya. G, Jamshidi. P, 2013, The Assessment of Health Centers Services of Zabol City Using TOPSIS Model, Geography and planning journal,  Vol 17, Issue 43, PP 169- 190, Tabriz University. [In Persian]. 
  1. Mohammadi. J, Ahmadi. M, Azadi Ghatar. S, Golamhoseyni. R, 2015, Analysis and Evaluation of Development of Urban Services Indicators in West Azerbaijan Province Cities by Using MCDM Techniques, Geography and planning journal,  Vol 19, Issue 53, PP 299- 323, Tabriz University. [In Persian]. 
  2. Nastaran. M, Abolhassani. F, Bakhtiaei. N, 2015, Spatial Distribution of Development Indexes in Iranian Cities Using Combinational Ranking, Journal Management system, Vol 5, Issue 17, Pp 1-14,Marvdasht. [In Persian].
  3. Nazmfar. H, Padarvandy. B, 2015, Comparative analysis of the Application of Multi-Criteria analysis (MCDM) (Case study: Lorestan Province) Journal Management system, Vol 5, Issue 17, Pp 31-44,Marvdasht. [In Persian].
  1. Sadrmousavi,. M, Talebzade. M, 2013, Determining and Analyzing Levels of Development in Rural Areas of Chaldran County, Geography and planning journal, Vol 17, Issue 44, Pp 217- 235, Tabriz University.[In Persion].
  2. Saie. A, 2007, Development in demur philosophy, Ghoomes pablication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  3. Saraei. H, Tavosiyan. A, Alahverdi. M, Rezaei. H, 2015, Assessment and regionalization the seven cities of Kohgiloyeh and Boyerahmad province development by emphasis on cultural factors, Journal Management system, Vol 5, Issue 20, Pp 15- 28, Marvdasht. [In Persian].
  4. Shakoei. H, 1998, Urban geographt a new perspective, Samt pablication, Tehran. [In Persian].
  1. Shamsodini. A, Rahimi. A, 2014, Grading the rural settlments of mamasani citys by using the techniques of organizing spaces, Journal Management system, Vol 4, Issue 14, Pp 87- 102, Marvdasht. [In Persian].
  2. Statistical yearbook of Hamadan province in 2013, www.amar.ir [In Persian].
  1. Zaheri, M. Aghayari Hir, M. Zakeri Minab, K. 2015, Prioritization of Agricultural Processing and Complementary Industries in Azarshahr County by Delphi and TOPSIS Combined Methods, Geography and planning journal, Vol 19, Issue 51, Pp 221- 246, Tabriz University. [In Persian].  
  2. Ziari. K, Zanjeerchi. S,  Sourkhkamal. K, 2010, A study and measurement of the development degree of the counties of  Khorasan Razavy province using Topsis technique. Research human geography journal, Vol 42, Issue 72, Pp 17-30, Tehran . [In Persian].

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 25 فروردین 1396
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 25 فروردین 1396

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار