تحلیل تطبیقی شکوفایی شهری در مدل ادغامی کپلند (مطالعه موردی: مناطق شهری کرمانشاه)

Urban prosperity can be considered as one of the most recent views in urban planning, which is associated with balanced and harmonious development in an environment of fairness and justice, and is based on concepts derived from the concept of sustainable development. The present research is applied in terms of nature and method; descriptive-analytical and purpose-oriented. The data needed for the research data were first prepared by SPSS software and raw materials were entered into the models. Using the T test, the urban flourishing condition of the eight regions of Kermanshah was measured and then entered into the EXCEL program environment. And by using multi-criteria decision-making models such as Vicore, Electric, Tapiss and Copeld's integration model, Kermanshah regions were ranked and prioritized in terms of urban flourishing. T-test results for urban flourishing indicators showed that the difference between regions at the level of urban flourishing indicators was significant and the highest difference was in area 1 (3.2) in the operation index, Therefore, it is important to study this difference using decision making models. The final results of this study showed that based on the analysis of applied multi criteria models and the Copeland integration model (POSET), the ranking of the degree and suitability of each of the eight areas of the city of Kermanshah in a total of combined urban flourishing indicators, respectively, included areas one, six, eight, three , Seven, five, four and finally the second region. Therefore, the Kermanshah city has the highest priority and the first priority in terms of urban flourishing indicators, and the last one is allocated to the second region.
 
Key words: Comparative Analysis , Urban Prosperity, MCDM model, Kermanshah  
 
 
1- INTRODUCTION              
Urban Prosperity can be considered as one of the most recent approaches in urban planning. Urban Prosperity has an unbreakable link with the quality of urban life and development. Urban Prosperity factors are multi-dimensional and complex issue. Understanding these complexities, access, valuation and measurement parameters is important. Also, the Urban Prosperity Initiative (CPI) pursues higher levels of sustainable development because it introduces cities and urban areas that In addition to producing and paying attention to the technology, it has to indicators such as happiness, vitality and dynamism, which urban management is less concerned with today. Urban Prosperity not only determines the indicators and scales, but also provides opportunities identifying and the potential for city intervention in their welfare and prosperity for local authorities and stakeholders.  
2- Theoretical Framework
Prosperity is a broad concept that is associated with balanced and harmonious development in an environment of justice. Urban Prosperity is one of the concepts that has emerged from the Theory of sustainable development. Urban Prosperity is a concept that, for the first time in the 1930s, was initially a debate around it, and to date, various studies have been done to complete it. But officially the City of Flourish theory was presented by the UN's Human Habitat Program (UNHCR) in 2012 during the economic crisis by Jon Klaus, Executive Director of Human Habitat. From Habitat's point of view, Prosperity is a kind of social construction that empowers human activities. Therefore, a Prosperity city is formed by integrating five vital dimensions (productivity, quality of life, infrastructure, equality and social participation, and the environment).
3- Methodology
The purpose of this research is applied and in terms of nature and method its descriptive-analytical research. Data and information are collected in both documentary and survey methods. The linear process of the present study in the form of study steps is:
Step1: Identify and encode the sub-criteria and components of urban Prosperity and data analyze using SPSS software;
Step2: Validation and analysis of the mean differences and significant variables in each of the eight areas of Kermanshah;
Step3: Assess the standard weight of each of the main variables through Shannon entropy to participate in the initial analysis;
Step4: Standardize or normalize decision matrices for each of the decision models;
Step5: Weigh out the normal matrix and determine the values ​​of the highest and lowest values ​​of the normal weight matrix;
Step6: Determine the utility indicators of the main indicators of each urban area using the models of VIKOR, TOPSIS, and Electre;
Step7: Integration in the direction of verification by using the Copeland integration model and determining the final priorities of the indicators in urban areas of Kermanshah;
Step8: Draw Priority and rankings Maps of urban Prosperity in each urban area using the Arc GIS10.2 software.
4- Results & Discussion
At first, in order to investigate the influential urban Prosperity indicators, t-test was used to identify the significant indicators. The results of the test for urban Prosperity indicators indicate that there is a significant difference between the regions at the level of urban Prosperity indicators, which indicates that there is a difference between regions at urban Prosperity level. The present study uses five main indicators with 14 sub-criteria and 55 Sub-component to evaluate and prioritize the urban Prosperity index of target regions, and each of the following sub indicators is distributed through a questionnaire distributed among experts and an existing statistics about each urban regions of Kermanshah were evaluated and ranked and multiplied by multi-criteria decision making models (ELECTRE, VIKOR and TOPSIS) and ultimately, by using Copeland's integration technique.
5- Conclusion & Suggestions
The results of t-test the urban Prosperity indicators of the regions showed that the indices had a high significance level. In other words, the difference between regions at the level of urban Prosperity indicators is significant and the highest difference is in region 1(3.2) in the productivity index, which indicates that there is a difference between areas at the level of urban Prosperity. Analysis of each of the effective indicators of urban Prosperity  in Kermanshah region using decision models showed that the total of indicators in each urban area using the VIKOR model consisted of 6, 1, 8, 7, 4, 3 , 2 and 5 Region, and in terms of Investigate in the TOPSIS model, these regions consisted of 7, 1, 6, 8, 2, 5, 3, 4, and using the model of the electre showed that the importance of the regions were 1, 8, 6, 3, 2, 7, 4 and 5.
Finally, Multi-criteria analysis of the applied models and Copeland integration model (POSET) showed that the Arrange of each 8 regions of Kermanshah in the total compilation of indices using the Copeland model, respectively, included areas 1, 6, 8, 3 , 7, 5, 4 and finally 2 region. Therefore, the 1 urban region of Kermanshah has the highest priority and the first priority in terms of urban Prosperity indicators and the last area is allocated to the 2 region. So according to the results, suggestions are presented as follows:
v  Improving the status of urban Prosperity indicators in low privileged areas and trying to improve it;
v  Modification of urban management approach to top-down planning, rather than down-up, in order to attract more attention to low-income areas;
v  Long-term, medium-term and short-term planning to improve urban Prosperity in low privileged region;
v  Developing and presenting executive studies for each of the 8 region of Kermanshah in order to identify the sub-sections facilitating the promotion of urban Prosperity;