The Role of “Scale” on the Acceleration of Social Interaction in Urban Spaces




Urban Space, Obsolescent Neighborhoods, Social Interaction, Evaluation Indicators, Functional Scale


Rehabilitation projects are interventions that can lead to the transformation of the socio-spatial structure of obsolescent neighborhoods. The main intention of such projects is the creation and/or improvement of social interactions after physical and functional interventions. Urban Renewal Organization of Tehran (UROT) is tasked with identification of target obsolescent neighborhoods, preparation of neighborhood development plans and implementation of rehabilitation projects to improve the quality of space and stimulate social interactions. In this paper, three urban spaces in different scales (“micro” for neighborhoods, “meso” for local and “macro” for trans-local scales), designed and implemented by UROT, were selected as a case study. By designing and filling a questionnaire and after analyzing research findings, the effect of the scale of the urban project on different activities was evaluated based on the Gehl model. Overall, in the expanded model based on the scale of space, an inverse ratio between the scale of space and both optional selective and social activities has been revealed.


Download data is not yet available.


Das, D. (2008). Urban Quality of Life: A Case Study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 297-310.

Duivenvoorden, E., Hartmann, T., Brinkhuijsen, M., & Hesselmans, T. (2021). Managing public space – A blind spot of urban planning and design. Cities, 109, 103032.

Dunenberg, L., Fromkin, A., & Jackson, R. (2016). Healthy spaces & places. U. o. Arts.

Gehl, J. (2011). LIFE BETWEEN BUILDINGS. Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press.

Ghaed Rahmati, S., Reza Ali, M., Hashemi zehi, S., & Javan, F. (2018). Components influencing promotion of social interactions in urban parks (Case Study: Zabol City). Human Geography Research Quarterly, 49(4).

Hussein, N. (2018). The pedestrianisation and its relation with enhancing walkability in urban spaces. Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs, 2(1), 102-112.

Ji, H., & Ding, W. (2021). Mapping urban public spaces based on the Nolli map method. Frontiers of Architectural Research.

Klein, W., Dove, M. R., & Felson, A. J. (2021). Engaging the unengaged: Understanding residents’ perceptions of social access to urban public space. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 59, 126991.

Mouratidis, K., & Poortinga, W. (2020). Built environment, urban vitality and social cohesion: Do vibrant neighborhoods foster strong communities? Landscape and Urban Planning, 204, 103951.

Oldenburg, R. (1989). The great good place: Cafés, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. Paragon House Publishers.

Rafieian, M., & Asgari, A. (2000). The elderly and the need to arrange urban spaces. International Conference on the Elderly (pp. 9-19), Tehran: Faculty of Welfare and Rehabilitation, University of Tehran.

Reilly, C. J., & Renski, H. (2008). Place and prosperity: quality of place as an economic driver. Maine Policy Review, 17(1), 12-25.

Sadri, S. Z. (2017). The Scale of Public Space: Taksim Square in Istanbul. Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs, 1(1), 67-75.

Zerouati, W., & Bellal, T. (2020). Evaluating the impact of mass housings' in-between spaces' spatial configuration on users' social interaction. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 9(1), 34-53.



How to Cite

Hajialiakbari, K., Zare, M., & Karimi, M. (2022). The Role of “Scale” on the Acceleration of Social Interaction in Urban Spaces. Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs, 6(1), 59–68.



Citizenship Rights and Responsibilities