Urban Innovation Ecosystems and Urban Regeneration: A Innovative Strategy to Enhancing Environmental Quality, Case Study: District 17 of Tehran Municipality

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate in Urban Planning. Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Faculty of Engineering, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Urban Planning and Design, Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran.

Abstract

Urban design, as the science and art of organizing and creating urban spaces, plays a critical role in enhancing the quality of life for citizens. One of the contemporary approaches to urban design is urban regeneration, which focuses on the reuse of abandoned spaces, the renovation, and repurposing of underutilized lands, transforming these areas into dynamic and efficient urban centers. The regeneration of abandoned lands and their conversion into innovation hubs is not only an economic solution but also a social, cultural, and environmental approach that contributes to the creation of vibrant, sustainable, and high-quality cities for living. This approach enables cities to evolve beyond being mere residential areas, becoming spaces for growth, connection, and inspiration. The main research question is: How can innovation ecosystems practically contribute to the process of urban regeneration? The study is applied in nature and falls within the category of analytical research. Data collection was carried out using both library research and field methods (interviews), while data analysis was conducted using GIS software. To this end, the activity patterns and innovation management frameworks within innovation ecosystems were first identified (including science and technology parks, innovation stations and factories, innovation centers, and co-working and dedicated spaces). The minimum area requirements for the establishment of these models were also determined. Subsequently, abandoned lands in District 17 of Tehran were identified, and based on their respective areas, functional patterns were assigned. The results indicate the following:
- 23 Parcels are suitable for establishing innovation stations and factories.
- 11 Parcels are suitable for innovation centers.
- 38 Parcels can be used to develop co-working and dedicated workspaces.
- Additionally, 12 lands with appropriate density considerations can be adapted for co-working and dedicated workspaces.
Science and technology parks, being of a supra-regional scale, are not feasible for establishment within this district.

Highlights

  • Defining the activity patterns of innovation ecosystems in Tehran and determining the minimum area required for the establishment of each activity pattern. 
  • Grouping abandoned land parcels in District 17 of Tehran for the establishment of various innovation patterns.

Keywords


  • Autio, E., & Thomas, L. (2020). Innovation ecosystems. In S. Nambisan, K. Lyytinen, & Y. Yoo (Eds.), Handbook of digital innovation (pp. 107–132). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
  • Bevilacqua, C., Pizzimenti, P., & Ou, Y. (2023). Cities in transition and urban innovation ecosystems: Place and innovation dynamics in the case of Boston and Cambridge (USA). Sustainability, 15(18), 13346. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813346
  • Boyer, J. (2020). Toward an evolutionary and sustainability perspective of the innovation ecosystem: Revisiting the panarchy model. Sustainability, 12(8), 3232. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083232
  • Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2010). Public places, urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Routledge.
  • Evans, G. (2009). Creative cities, creative spaces and urban policy. Urban Studies, 46(5-6), 1003–1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009103853
  • Florida, R. (2020). The rise of the creative class: Revised and expanded. Basic Books.
  • Gehl, J. (2013). Cities for people. Island Press.
  • Granstrand, O., & Holgersson, M. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90–91, 102098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102098
  • Katz, B., & Wagner, J. (2014). The rise of innovation districts: A new geography of innovation in America (Metropolitan Policy Program). Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/InnovationDistricts1.pdf
  • Landry, C. (2000). The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. Earthscan Publications.
  • Moretti, E. (2019). The new geography of jobs. HarperCollins Publishers.
  • Mulas, V., Minges, M., & Applebaum, H. R. (2016). Boosting tech innovation ecosystems in cities: A framework for growth and sustainability of urban tech innovation ecosystems. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 11(1-2), 98–125. https://doi.org/10.1162/inov_a_00251
  • Naghashzadian, S., Rafiyan, M., Zeraabadi, Z. S. S., & Majidi, H. (2023). Developing a conceptual model for innovative urban regeneration in interaction with smart cities: Using the meta-synthesis method (2010-2020). Quarterly Journal of Geography and Regional Planning, 12(49), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.22034/jgeoq.2023.343593.3716 [In Persian].
  • Neufert, E. (2019). Neufert's architecture data. Translated by K. Mahmoudi, P. Baradaran Mohaajer. Shahrab Publishing, Future Builders. [In Persian].
  • (2022). Innovation ecosystems and urban regeneration: Policy recommendations. OECD Publishing.
  • Praharaj, S. (2021). Area-based urban renewal approach for smart cities development in India: Challenges of inclusion and sustainability. Urban Planning, 6(4), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v6i4.4484
  • Remesar, A. (2016). The art of urban design in urban regeneration: Interdisciplinarity, policies, governance, public space. Universitat de Barcelona. http://www.publicacions.ub.edu/ficha.aspx?cod=08455
  • Roberts, P., & Sykes, H. (2000). Urban regeneration: A handbook. SAGE Publications.
  • Russell, M. G., & Smorodinskaya, N. V. (2018). Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 114–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.024
  • Smorodinskaya, N. V., Russell, M. G., Katukov, D., & Still, K. (2017). Innovation ecosystems vs. innovation systems in terms of collaboration and co-creation of value. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, Hilton Waikoloa Village, HI, USA.
  • Technical Affairs Department, Organization for Planning and Budget, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. (1998). Publication No. 178 [In Persian].
  • UN-Habitat. (2020). The world’s cities in 2020: Data booklet. United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
  • UN-Habitat. (2021). Innovative urban regeneration strategies. United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
Volume 1, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
January 2025
Pages 31-56
  • Receive Date: 24 August 2024
  • Revise Date: 29 September 2024
  • Accept Date: 03 November 2024
  • First Publish Date: 19 January 2025
  • Publish Date: 19 January 2025