Evaluating the importance of physical resilience criteria of run-down urban fabrics with using of Improved analytical hierarchy process (IAHP) method

Background and objective: Crises provide very short time to make decisions by creating unexpected and unstable conditions. Lack of preparation before crises, can lead to widespread negative consequences such as disorder, fragility, disintegration, instability, threat to values and conflict. In the last two decades, the issue of resiliency has been addressed due to the dramatic increase in damages caused by over concentration of people and resources in urban areas. Resilience is a multifaceted concept, so planning for physical resilience can be considered as one of the most important factors in reducing the effects of hazards. However, there are still serious ambiguities in the detailed explanation of physical resilience criteria and the importance and priority of each of them, which has led to a serious problem in determining planning priorities in urban development plans. Therefore, the aim and endeavor of this research is to state the most important criteria of physical resilience and then determine their importance. In this way, it will help to redefine the priorities in resiliency planning in the management of the country's cities. Method: This research is applied in terms of essence and descriptive-analytical in terms of method with using quantitative IAHP method. Documentary studies, exploratory interviews and the results of the expert panel were used in data collection. Findings: This research, after reviewing various texts and sources and the opinions of professors and urban planning professionals, has explained seventeen criteria of physical resilience in three levels and five fields and has determined the coefficient of preference and priority of action in urban development plans. Conclusion: Creating the change in the state of physical resilience, requires long-term planning, application of urban planning and architectural technical criteria, significant investment and continuous monitoring of executive results, which in many cases is beyond the capacity of urban administrations. Therefore, by formulating a specific action plan, the criteria that cause the most damage if ignored should be prioritized for correction and implementation. However, the importance of other criteria should not be neglected.