Examining Social Issues and Their Prioritization in Affluent vs. Deprived Urban Neighborhoods: A Policy Analysis of Kermanshah, Iran

IntroductionA social problem is an issue that is widely seen as challenging within a society. This definition combines objective and subjective factors and varies across time and location. Marginalized and deprived neighborhoods are a major problem in modern cities, causing various types of social harm (Amiri et al., 2013). Kermanshah, a major Iranian city, faces this issue - it has 36 designated high-need areas, 13 of which are marginalized. Despite efforts to address these neighborhoods, the results have been unsatisfactory. The key question is: what prioritization framework should policies use to target social problems in these neighborhoods and how does it align with the actual prevalence of issues in the areas? Materials & MethodsThis study used a mixed-methods approach, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative components. For the quantitative portion, a survey was conducted. A multi-stage cluster sampling technique was used to select 800 households from 2 affluent neighborhoods and 13 deprived neighborhoods. The target population included all households in the selected areas (Statistics Center of Iran, 2015). The initial sample size, calculated using Cochran's formula, was 400 households. However, to ensure a minimum of 30 samples for smaller neighborhoods and a maximum of 100 for larger ones, the final sample size increased to 650 households in the deprived neighborhoods and 150 in the affluent ones. The validity of the survey questionnaire was confirmed through expert review. The qualitative component used a three-tier approach to establish the research validity and reliability. Discussion of Results & ConclusionThe research findings indicated that the residents of deprived neighborhoods primarily viewed economic issues, such as poverty, unemployment, and deprivation, as the most pressing social problems. However, the specific priorities identified by the local stakeholders for addressing these issues did not always align with the actual prevalence of problems in the communities. A key insight was the disconnect between the severity of problems in a neighborhood and the prioritization for addressing them. While economic challenges were widely recognized as major social issues, the priorities identified by the local actors often focused on other concerns, such as security, accessibility, health, and education infrastructure. This suggested a duality between the prevalence of problems and prioritization of solutions. These findings indicated