Explain the Model of Sustainable Development in Border Areas with Emphasis on the Components of the Smart City, Case study: Border City of Urmia

Today, achieving sustainable urban development is not possible without a clear strategy. The smart city is emerging as a vital strategy to reduce the problems caused by population and massive urbanization in border areas. No research has been done on sustainable development with the smart city approach in the border city of Urmia. Therefore, this study aims to develop a clear framework for sustainable urban development of Urmia based on the components of the smart city. The present research is applied-developmental in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of content and method. The statistical sample size was estimated through Sample Power software, which is equal to 125 people. It should be noted that the working method of Sample Power software is based on latent and obvious variables, and therefore, the size of the statistical population has no effect on estimating the sample size. The sampling method is also simple random. The results show that all six components of smart urban growth have a positive and significant effect on achieving sustainable urban development. Based on path analysis, the components of smart government with path coefficient (impact) of 0.440, smart economy with 0.242, smart mobility with 0.214, smart life with 0.212, smart citizen 0.164, and smart environment with 0.139, respectively, have the greatest impact on achieving sustainable development of Urmia. An important point seen in the findings is the component of smart government, which was ranked first and indicates the importance of good governance and cooperation and interaction of various institutions and requires special attention. Also, according to the model, in the case of estimating standard coefficients, it became clear that the consequence of sustainable urban development is physical stability with a coefficient of 0.883, economic stability with a coefficient of 0.867, socio-cultural stability coefficient with a coefficient of 0.814, and environmental stability coefficient with a coefficient of 0.637.