Spatial-social pattern of Tehran's protests in autumn 2022

Introduction
As the political hub of Iran, Tehran has witnessed several waves of protest and social protests over the past four decades, rooted in diverse political, economic, and cultural contexts and involving various socio-economic classes. The most recent protests and protest occurred in the autumn of 2022. Following the death of a 22-year-old woman in the custody of Tehran’s morality police during the final days of summer 2022, a wave of protest erupted in Tehran and other Iranian cities, lasting for several weeks. These incidents differed significantly from the spatial-temporal patterns and protest methods observed in Tehran’s previous decades of protest. From a socio-spatial perspective, these events can be regarded as a new form of protest and social protest.This study aims to analyze the distribution, intensification, and spread of the 2022 protest in Tehran using the theory of spatial diffusion in geography, identifying the spatial patterns of these incidents. According to this theory, phenomena spread across geographical areas through several mechanisms, including hierarchical diffusion, contagious diffusion, reinforcement diffusion, and spatial redistribution. The primary goal of this article is to identify the spatial diffusion patterns and spread of protest across Tehran using this framework.Additionally, the authors of this article seek to analyze the organization and direction of protests and protest through the lens of collective action theory. In this approach, neighborhoods and local spaces provide the framework and conditions necessary for collective action, including shared interests, organization, mobilization, and opportunities.The central research question of this study concerns the socio-spatial patterns of the autumn 2022 protest in Tehran and the role of neighborhoods as geographical and social units in these incidents. The preliminary response and hypothesis proposed are that these protests exhibited spatial-temporal patterns distinct from those of previous years, with critics and opponents employing different tools and methods.
 
Materials and Methods
This study is applied in its objective and descriptive-analytical in nature, employing a mixed-methods approach with quantitative (Spatial Statistics Tools) and qualitative (field observation) components. The study area encompasses the city of Tehran and its neighborhoods.Data collection was divided into two parts: library/documentary and field methods. In the library section, due to the lack of an independent and reliable source publishing information on the protest, the researchers relied on data and reports from social media, international news agencies, and online platforms. To verify this information, they monitored its frequency and repetition across various social media channels. In the field section, the researchers actively participated in the gatherings as observers and data collectors, recording the behavior and conditions of the participants. This provided the authors with direct and unmediated data.To identify the patterns of protest, the study employed the K-function test in Geographic Information System (GIS) software. Additionally, the Getis-Ord Gi statistic was used to examine clustering boundaries and variable significance.
The Anselin Local Moran's I index was applied to determine the degree of spatial autocorrelation of protest 
events. Furthermore, GIS maps were utilized to visualize the distribution and dispersion of protest throughout Tehran for more precise spatial analysis.In the qualitative component, the field observation technique was employed to identify the methods and tools of protests at the neighborhood level.
 
Results and Discussion
The results of Ripley's K Function test indicate that the spatial pattern of protest points in Tehran is distributed in a clustered manner. The Getis-Ord Gi test further reveals that 38 neighborhoods, with confidence levels ranging from 90% to 99%, fall within the boundaries of protest hotspots.The protest hotspots in central Tehran include the neighborhoods of Tehran University, Valiasr, Fatemi, Jamalzadeh, Keshavarz, Jihad, Iranshahr, Ferdowsi, and Enqelab-Palestine. These hotspots are predominantly located in District 6 of Tehran, an area with a high concentration of educational institutions and academic facilities. The presence of these institutions has led to a significant presence of youth, women, and students, contributing to the formation of protest and gatherings.The eastern Tehran hotspot comprises neighborhoods such as West Tehran Pars, Northern Narmak, Elm-o-Sanat (Science and Technology), Majidabad, Ghanat Koohsar, and Kalad. These areas are primarily residential and home to the middle-class urban population.In western Tehran, neighborhoods such as Sadeghiyeh, Tarasht, Marzdaran, Abazar, Apadana, Ferdows, Sattarkhan, Teymoori, Bimeh, and Eram, which are predominantly residential and inhabited by middle-class residents, form another hotspot of protest.In northern Tehran, two hotspots with lower intensity compared to those in the central, eastern, and western areas have emerged. One hotspot includes the neighborhoods of Saei, Davoodieh, Seyyed Khandan, Kavousiyeh, and Niloufar, while the other, located further north, encompasses neighborhoods such as Velenjak, Ovin, Vanak, Sa’adatabad, and Darya. These neighborhoods are primarily inhabited by the middle and upper classes.The spatial continuity of neighborhoods located within the protest hotspots demonstrates a pattern of adjacency-based diffusion and reinforcement in the spread of protest.Additionally, the Anselin Local Moran's I test indicates that 16 neighborhoods in central, western, eastern, and northern Tehran exhibit high spatial autocorrelation of protest, influenced by neighborhood proximity and adjacency.Neighborhoods such as Tehran University, Keshavarz, Valiasr, Jamalzadeh, Ferdowsi, Iranshahr, and Enqelab-Palestine, along with their adjacent neighborhoods in central Tehran, have experienced a high number of protests. In western Tehran, four neighborhoods—Sadeghiyeh, Sattarkhan, Tarasht, and Marzdaran—and their neighboring areas have witnessed significant numbers of protests. In eastern Tehran, Northern Narmak and Elm-o-Sanat share similar conditions.In northern Tehran, three neighborhoods—Davoodieh, Kavousiyeh, and Ovin—have formed clusters that, along with their surrounding neighborhoods, have experienced numerous protests and exhibit high spatial autocorrelation. Statistical tests and quantitative analyses have shown that protest clusters formed in neighborhoods with more homogeneous social structures and a middle-class urban demographic. These protests were largely organized by women and youth, with the goal of attaining individual and social freedoms. Unlike the violent and intense protest of 2017 and 2019, which were mainly economically and livelihood-driven, the protests in the fall of 2022 in Tehran were centered on social and freedom-based demands.In the qualitative findings, one of the significant features of these protests was the extensive use of local neighborhood facilities and characteristics by the protesters. Neighborhoods, by providing social and spatial opportunities, created a conducive environment for protests. Protesters' geographic and social knowledge of the neighborhoods facilitated rapid mobility, evasion from security forces, and even nighttime protests from within their homes. As nightfall occurred, protesters had more opportunities to hide and escape from security forces. Additionally, many surveillance cameras in the city did not have sufficient visibility or lighting to capture protestors' faces.Moreover, protesters employed new methods, such as graffiti in public spaces, the destruction or alteration of government symbols, and scattered gatherings across neighborhoods, which reduced the security costs of protests while increasing their impact. Therefore, one spatial dimension of the protest was the destruction or alteration of symbols and urban landscapes that remind the public of the ruling political regime. Writing slogans on public space walls such as parks, streets, and altering street and alley names, as well as defacing portraits of political and military leaders, represented methods of resisting the ruling discourse—tactics not seen in previous protests. This type of protest had a significant spread throughout Tehran and became widespread at the neighborhood level. The use of this method was so extensive that in some neighborhoods, many walls were painted over, and the municipality began erasing 
these slogans.Additionally, the dynamic nature of the protests was another prominent feature. Unlike past protests, the demonstrations were dispersed across neighborhoods, with protesters shifting locations and moving to various parts of the city, complicating the actions of security forces. In fact, the dynamic nature and mobility of the protest were a key strength for the protesters. During these protests, demonstrators generally started walking along a particular path or street, chanting protest slogans. The protest routes were not pre-determined, and depending on the security situation and police presence, the protests would shift to smaller streets or alleys, regrouping in another intersection or square.Furthermore, nighttime chanting and protests from within apartments introduced new dimensions to the protests that had not been observed before. In fact, the neighborhood and its geographical, spatial, and social features provided the necessary conditions for collective action (In this case, protest).
Conclusion
The autumn 2022 protest in Tehran exhibited significant differences in its spatial-social patterns and protest methods compared to past protest. Unlike the linear and centralized patterns of previous years, these protests occurred in a point-based and clustered manner across neighborhoods. Statistical analyses revealed that hot spots of protest were located in the center, west, east, and north of Tehran, and the geographical proximity of neighborhoods played a significant role in the spread of the protests. This cluster pattern reflected the influence of reinforcement and neighborhood dynamics in the formation of gatherings. The shift in protest patterns from main streets to neighborhoods was a creative response to previous confrontations and an effort to reduce the security costs for protesters.Neighborhoods, due to their homogeneous social structure, close social interactions, and geographical knowledge, provided a suitable environment for organizing and mobilizing collective action. Protesters employed diverse tactics, such as scattered gatherings, nighttime protests, graffiti, and repeated movement and relocation. Furthermore, the widespread spatial nature of the protest, which, on some days, resulted in protests across multiple neighborhoods with significant geographic distances between them, covering up to 60% of the city, made it challenging for security forces to manage.The results showed that these protests were largely organized by the middle class, women, and youth, with the goal of attaining social and individual freedoms. Neighborhoods, as new spatial-social units, provided opportunities for resistance and expression of dissent. These findings highlight the significant role of neighborhoods in urban protest, demonstrating that neighborhoods have become a key space for protests and collective resistance. Analyzing these developments can contribute to a better understanding of social dynamics and the management of urban protest in the future.