Introduction
Scientific strategies are widely used for knowledge management and other fields, including risk management. According to the Oxford Dictionary, a strategy is a “plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall goal.” A risk strategy expresses the etiological foundations of risks and their operational aspects in the context of management in a natural environment (Inkpen, 2005, Keith et al., 2006; Moghimi, 2022). Given the importance of risk strategy in developing national and regional laws and guidelines, contemporary cognitive scientists, by developing and explaining the human and natural aspects of risk, illuminate the complexities of scientific research in the field of risk through direct examination of hazardous events and scientific practice. A risk strategy considers prevention and management laws rather than response laws, and prioritizes facilitating the provision of the necessary infrastructure to reduce risks. Having a risk management strategy clarifies the actions and requirements. It also causes new investments for development to be recognized from a risk management perspective and ensures that they are not risky or wasteful. Having a risk strategy supports the adoption of new technologies for risk reduction. In other words, the main goal of risk strategy is to determine a vision for governments and people towards a risk-free or low-risk society and environment (Moghimi, 2022). 
Conventional crisis management methods in Iran that involve a main organization and several member and partner organizations, each with duties and authorities within a hierarchical structure at the national and provincial levels, will no longer meet the country’s needs; it is necessary to consider risk reduction and crisis management as a national priority in a strategic and fundamental manner, with the participation of all relevant sectors and organizations in the country, based on adequate assessment and recognition of the roots and negative effects of all risks and incidents, and also with regard to social factors, including effective public participation (Mohaghegh, 2017). Given the limitations of the physical approach to crisis management and its very high costs, it is necessary to adopt measures that reduce the community’s vulnerability and facilitate the crisis management cycle by empowering local communities (Motahari & Rafeian, 2016).
Although natural disasters occur worldwide, the Asian region is the most affected, accounting for 40% of all disasters, 49% of all deaths, and 66% of all people affected (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, 2021). On the other hand, Iran’s ranking among the top 10 most disaster-prone countries in the world (Guha-Sapir, 2004) underscores the need to strengthen the community-based approach to the crisis management system. In Iran, most strategies for risk management and mitigation operate within a traditional and inefficient planning model, which proceeds as follows: reporting the occurrence of a risk, estimating the amount of damage, compensating for the damage through financial assistance, and waiting for another event. This approach treats risks as a static phenomenon and views damage reduction (through financial assistance) as an upward, linear, and positive trend. However, there is still insufficient understanding that environmental hazards are not linear issues and that the risk of occurrence cannot be reduced solely through financial compensation and reporting, suggesting shortcomings in risk management. To overcome these shortcomings, a change in approach towards a “sustainable risk reduction” is necessary. This concept links the wise management of existing natural resources to local social and economic resilience (Moghimi, 2024).
Ardabil, a city in Iran, is located in a region with specific conditions, including the existence of numerous faults, a history of earthquakes, being on a flat plain, and cold weather, which increase the likelihood of various natural hazards, including floods, earthquakes, storms, and snow and ice. On the other hand, the recent developments in Ardabil City as a result of the increase in the city’s population have led to the creation and intensification of problems such as economic, cultural, and social problems, unfair distribution of lands and facilities, marginalization, lack of public space, social harms, traffic problems, poor infrastructure, etc. Therefore, given the shortcomings of the existing crisis management system in Iran which leads to failure in disaster prevention, preparedness, and response, the importance of a community-centered approach, and the conditions of Ardabil City, proper strategies should be developed to strengthen the community-centered approach to risk management in the city, in order to enable the success of crisis management programs and plans in achieving predetermined goals. In this regard, the present study aims to develop strategies to strengthen the community-based approach to crisis management in Ardabil City. Therefore, to achieve the goal, the following questions are raised: What are the components of the community-centered approach to crisis management? What are the strategies for strengthening the community-centered approach to crisis management in Ardabil City?

Theoretical background
The support or logistics approach, as one of the sub-approaches of the modern approach, is based on first aid and rescue, which was formed in parallel with the establishment of international organizations such as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). After World War II and the dominance of scientific and technical discourses and schools, to avoid the destructive effects of disasters and prevent such risks, scientific and engineering solutions were prioritized as another sub-approach in crisis management, known as the preventive approach. This approach continued until the 1980s. Since the early 1980s, with the intensification of problems and issues in most developing and underdeveloped countries resulting from the failure of unbalanced development plans that were not in line with local conditions (such as rural migration to cities, increased marginalization, increased population density, illegal construction, etc.), the losses caused by crises have increased. The accidents and disasters of the 1980s showed that the preventive approach was not sufficient to deal with disasters and that insufficient attention was paid to the human factors and variables of societies. As a result, a community-based approach to crisis management was formed, the main emphasis of which is on reducing the risk of human societies (Mohaghegh, 2012). Due to the ineffectiveness of the modern approach to crisis management, which has been influenced by the dominance of a top-down perspective, the community-centered approach is the principle and accepted approach in this field (Ratnayake et al., 2020). Some studies show that in human societies, risk-reduction activities are usually not carried out voluntarily by people, because most people believe that the government’s preventive activities can make them safe (Noori et al., 2018). 
Community-based risk management is a management approach used to reduce the risk of hazardous events in at-risk communities. In this approach, people actively participate in the identification, assessment, and resolution of problems arising from crises, in order to identify hazards, reduce vulnerability, and increase existing capacities. This means that people participate in all practical and executive activities related to the crisis management process (Rabiei & Pourhosseini, 2014). In general, in the community-based approach to crisis management, emphasis is placed on issues such as capacity building and social participation, in which measures and activities based on the involvement of local communities are proposed as a suitable alternative to the traditional approach (Rafeian et al., 2011). 
Sub-approaches to community-based crisis management include two approaches: Structural and institutional. The structural approach places special emphasis on socio-economic structures, and its planning model is supportive. The institutional approach is based on the concept of resilience, and its planning model is cooperative (Nojavan et al., 2021). Community-based crisis management, through the application of participatory approaches, aims to increase the capacity of communities, as a fundamental principle in the institutional approach, and focuses on rooting out the main causes of vulnerability, as a principle in the structural approach; achieving sustainable development is considered as its ultimate goal (Firozpour et al., 2016). 
According to the structural sub-approach to community-based risk management, environmental risks do not depend solely on natural, physical, and behavioral processes; rather, the growth of poverty and deprivation, and consequently the increase in economic vulnerability, increases the risks. According to this way of thinking, in any environment where its structure is unstable and hazardous events occur in a sequential or combined manner, the possibility that residents can reduce risks is very small, imposing heavy costs on the community. Structure-based thinking holds that communities and individuals exposed to hazards lack sufficient knowledge and awareness of the hazards in their environment, because their educational structure has not made any effort in this regard. According to the structural sub-approach, development and risk reduction are achieved in conditions where we rely on local knowledge rather than solely on imported technology. This approach actually seeks a deep and rooted social transformation. The structure-based perspective in the field of risk reduction discusses the relationship of risks and disasters of societies with the natural environment, social structure, underdevelopment, the government system and state, economic dependence, and ultimately educational and cultural structure (Moghimi, 2014). The structural sub-approach emphasizes evaluating the constraints that societies as social, political, economic, medical, environmental, and organizational institutions have created for themselves or have been imposed on them, and assessing their effects on reducing risks and vulnerability (Ferrier et al., 2003).
Based on the institutional sub-approach to community-based risk management, multiple stakeholders with different interests collaborate to develop a plan, without the supervision of institutions that traditionally controlled the planning process (Margerum, 2002), because the idea of ​​the collaborative planning model is unlimited exchange of ideas based on democracy in society (Sager, 2006). Nowadays, in crisis-affected societies, much attention is paid to existing institutional capacities for returning to initial conditions and rebuilding with minimal reliance on external assistance, underscoring the need for fundamental changes in the risk-reduction culture that prioritize resilience over vulnerability (Mayunga, 2007). While traditional approaches to resilience emphasize the conditions of returning to the past, modern approaches imply the capacity of regions to create new paths for the growth and development of societies (Hedayatifard & Rosenblatt, 2019). Institutionalism has emerged in recent years as one of the most successful theories for local and regional development. Institutionalism is an old idea whose paradigmatic development dates back at least to the early twentieth century and operates within a bottom-up framework (Teitz, 2007).
 In fact, the failure of top-down approaches led to a series of social and cultural issues, including trust, values ​​and norms, social capital, and human capacities, being considered in the field of urban, local, and regional planning and management (Hudson, 2004). In the field of institutional approach policy-making, the main attention is on reforming and improving local institutional procedures and arrangements. In this approach, the main emphasis is not only on mobilizing governmental institutions at the local level, but also on the role of non-governmental institutions (Amin, 1998). Table 1 shows a summary of known approaches in the field of crisis management and their comparison.

Empirical background
Rafeian and Motahari (2012) in a study showed that the cohesion and responsibility of neighborhood emergency response volunteers, as well as their management, had a significant relationship with the cognitive and behavioral factors of disaster risk management. Pourmousavi et al. (2013), in addition to conducting interpretive and historical research on the hyperactive strategy, addressed various dimensions of community-based crisis management and emphasized the need to implement scenarios that are consistent with the situation, characteristics, and capacities of urban neighborhoods to prepare for crises and control their effects.
Mohabati-Zahan et al. (2020) classified the factors affecting crisis management using the approach of building the capacity in local communities into four groups: “prevention and mitigation of the crisis”, “preparedness for the crisis”, “coping with the crisis”, and “reconstruction and recovery after the crisis”. Salehi Nodez et al. (2021) concluded that increasing the spirit of cooperation and motivating people to participate in crisis management are among the best ways to reduce communities’ vulnerability. Ahadnejhad-Roshti et al. (2022) found that four components, including participation/social networks, social capital, knowledge/skills, and knowledge/awareness, had the greatest impact on enhancing the community’s resilience to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Yeo et al. (2017) emphasized the importance of a cultural approach to crisis management and suggested that continuous learning, communication, and coordination between diverse cultures can increase the resilience of societies. Hostettler et al. (2019) stated that carefully designed community-based approaches are necessary to achieve sustainable and long-term transformational change and reduce risk. Some of the key factors influencing this include: Locally adapted technology, empowering local communities by building self-confidence and increasing their sense of responsibility, and creating a well-functioning local emergency committee.
Sarabia et al. (2020) showed that implementing interventions in three important areas had a positive and significant impact on the effectiveness of community-based crisis management, which are: knowledge and preparedness, social cohesion, and management of natural assets. Sharma et al. (2022) concluded that community participation is essential for implementing a disaster mitigation program at the local level, and that this is possible when the people themselves own the program and participate continuously in disaster mitigation activities and measures. Dejing (2023) emphasized the role of education, increasing people’s knowledge and awareness of environmental hazards, and improving the information system in strengthening public participation in crisis management. 
The review of international and national studies on community-based risk management showed that there are numerous studies in this field, but there is little research on providing risk strategies tailored to the conditions and situation of local communities. Table 2 shows the components of a community-based approach to risk management identified based on the review of the theoretical and practical background of the research topic.

Study area
The study area is the Ardabil City, the capital of Ardabil province, which is located in the northwest of Iran (47° 48’ E to 48° 39’ E and 37° 56’ N to 38° 33’ N). Its average altitude above sea level is 1345 meters. According to the 2016 National Population and Housing Census, the city’s population was 529,374. The geographical location of Ardabil City in the province and its five municipal districts are shown in Figure 1.

Materials and Methods
This is a survey and analytical study. The data were collected through library method and field visits. The library method was used to collect theoretical data and identify components (n=13) by reviewing documents and reports of community-based crisis management in organizations responsible for crisis management in Ardabil City. The field method was used to collect data by administering a questionnaire. The participants were 35 key informants, including experts, professors, and researchers in crisis management, selected via purposive sampling. Their characteristics are presented in Table 3. 
The SWOT method was used to analyze the data for providing strategies to strengthen the community-based approach to risk management in Ardabil City. For this purpose, first, through document review and environmental survey technique, an initial draft of internal factors (strengths and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) was prepared and then screened using expert opinions. Then, internal and external factors were included in a questionnaire rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was validated by experts and had reliability assessed using Cronbach’s α (Table 4). A score of 3 was considered as the threshold for selecting the final variables; therefore, those with an average higher than 3 were selected as research variables. Finally, 43 variables were identified for strengths, 38 for weaknesses, 40 for opportunities, and 38 for threats. Next, these factors were evaluated by weighting and ranking them. In the next step, four separate strategies were presented for each component, based on expert opinions and the four domains of the SWOT method. Finally, to select the superior strategy from among the strategies presented for each component, the quantitative strategic planning matrix (QSPM) was used.

Results

Internal and external factors affecting the community-based risk management in Ardabil
To present strategies, internal and external factors were first identified and evaluated. Each factor was first assigned a weight between 0 and 1, such that ultimately the sum of the weights was equal to 1. Each factor was then assigned a number between 1 and 4 based on its importance (1= fundamental weakness, 2= weakness, 3= strength, and 4= fundamental strength). Finally, the weight of each factor was multiplied by its current status score to obtain the weighted score for each factor. A weighted total score of 1-1.99 indicates internal weakness of the risk management system; 2-2.99, moderate status of risk management; and 3-4, optimal status of risk management (Tables 5 and 6). The total weighted scores for internal and external factors were 2.38 and 2.36, respectively.
The SWOT matrix of internal/external factors affecting the community-based risk management in Ardabil 
Based on the total weighted scores of internal and external factors, the status of the community-based risk management in Ardabil City was determined according to the four parts of the SWOT analysis. In Figure 2, the total scores for internal and external factors are plotted based on the X and Y axes of the SWOT matrix to show the community-based risk management system’s strategy relative to all factors. According to the results from internal factors, the system’s weaknesses outweighed its strengths, and based on the results from external factors, the threats to the system outweighed its opportunities. Therefore, the community-based risk management system in Ardabil City uses a defensive strategy. Thus, to strengthen this strategy, it is necessary to plan and take action to address weaknesses and avoid threats.

Providing strategies to improve the community-based risk management in Ardabil 
In Table 7, four types of strategies are presented for each study component, based on expert opinions and the four parts of the SWOT matrix. 

Choosing the best strategy using the QSPM
To select the best strategy from among the strategies presented for each component, the QSPM method was used. Each factor was assigned a number between 1 and 4, depending on its attractiveness. By multiplying each factor’s weighted score by its attractiveness score (AS), the total AS (TAS) of each factor was obtained. Finally, the strategy that achieved the highest TAS was selected as the superior strategy (Table 8). As can be seen, the best strategy for the component of “planning for vulnerable groups” was the SO strategy (TAS=3.255); for the component of “A program specific to each hazard”, the SO strategy (TAS=2.810); for the component of “Safety measures”, the ST strategy (TAS=2.192); for the component of “Knowledge/awareness of environmental hazards”, the WT strategy (TAS=2.718); for the component of “Applying modern crisis management methods”, the WO strategy (TAS=2.341); for the component of “Education, up-to-date studies and increasing knowledge”, the WO strategy (TAS=2.855); for the component of “Participation of local knowledgeable people in crisis management”, the WT strategy (TAS=2.500); for the component of “Belief in participation and teamwork”, the WT strategy (TAS=2.551); for the component of “Social responsibility”, the WO strategy (TAS=3.028); for the component of “Participation in local community programs, the WT strategy (TAS=2.197); for the component of “Social trust”, the WT strategy (TAS=2.487); for the component of “Motivation for people to participate”, the WT strategy (TAS=2.859); and for the component of “Financial partnership with local institutions”, the ST strategy (TAS=2.491).

Conclusion
According to the results, it can be said that despite the Ardabil City being at high risk of various disasters and the recurrence of numerous disasters, city officials unfortunately have not been able to realize the main deficiency of the urban crisis management system, i.e. the lack of public participation, which has caused the urban system to continue to be disrupted and confused by environmental hazards, despite spending large expenditures on the crisis management system.
Given the importance of strategic planning and its ability to help organizations and communities respond effectively to the changing conditions and circumstances, this study aimed to provide strategies to strengthen the community-based approach to crisis management in Ardabil City, using the SWOT analysis. First, considering the current situation, internal and external factors were identified and then these factors were evaluated. Finally, using the QSPM, 13 strategies were proposed as follows:
- Establishing explicit laws to provide social security services and health insurance to vulnerable groups in order to increase their resilience; 
- Using banking facilities to retrofit dilapidated buildings according to regulations; 
- Strengthening network security systems to implement gas network retrofitting projects; 
- Identifying new risks created by technological developments in order to have up-to-date information; 
- Benefiting from crisis management experts in Ardabil City by equipping them with modern knowledge and technology; 
- Creating an appropriate structure based on knowledge management for crisis management in all organizations, utilizing the principles mentioned in the national crisis management strategy document; 
- Removing obstacles to the formation of NGOs for crisis management in the city; 
- Increasing cultural activities in the city to increase the culture of helping and interacting; 
- Revival of the traditional view on neighborhoods while embracing modern developments in order to create a sense of belonging in residents; 
- Increasing the use of educational institutions in understanding and disseminating the concept of participation in order to promote public awareness; 
- Increasing residents’ awareness of the future of their neighborhood to build trust in the responsible institutions;
- Strengthening the infrastructure of democratic life to reduce the passive stance of citizens; 
- Delegating matters to the residents to increase the attention to the role of people. 

Ethical Considerations

Compliance with ethical guidelines
The ethical considerations in this study were fully observed. All participants provided informed consent prior to taking part in the research.

Funding
This study was extracted from the PhD dissertationof Homa Vaezi, approved by the Department of Geography and Urban and Rural Planning, Mohaghegh Ardabili University, Ardabil, Iran. This study was funded by the Ardabil Municipality.

Authors' contributions
Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, visualization, and supervision: All authors; Validation, investigation, original draft preparation: Homa Vaezi and Ata Ghaffari Gilandeh; Resources, review and editing: Homa Vaezi; Project administration: Atta Ghaffari Gilandeh.

Conflicts of interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all participants for their cooperation in this study.