جایگاه برنامه ریز در فرآیند برنامه ریزی شهری ایران

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، دکترای برنامه ریزی شهری و منطق های

2 دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، دکترای جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری

3 رشته جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری - دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

چکیده

برنامه ریزان به عنوان میانجی گران بین شناخت و کنش، جایگاه مهمی در به ثمر رسیدن مطلوبها در فرایند برنامه ریزی هر جامعه ای دارند. روند رویکردهای اخیر که مبتنی بر اجتماع و سیاسی شدن فرایند برنامه ریزی و بالطبع، دور شدن از فرایند برنامه ریزی صرفاً فنی، کالبدی و عقلانی بوده است، ذهنیت تغییر در بسیاری از راهبردهای برنامه ریزی را سبب شده است. برنامه ریزان در رویکردهای جدیدتر ترغیب شده اند تمامی تلاششان را معطوف به استفاده از تمامی نیروها، جهت پیشبرد اهداف، برای خلق جهانی بهتر کنند. رسیدن به این وضعیت، اصلاً روندی ساده و در دسترسی نبوده است. هنوز در بسیاری از کشورها (و ازجمله در کشور ما)، بخش عمده ای از تلاش برنامه ریزان در فرایند برنامه ریزی به سبب تعریف ناقص و ناکارآمد، و همچنین دخالت های دولتی، عملاً بی نتیجه مانده است. این مقاله می کوشد با نگاهی انتقادی، فرایند برنامه ریزی و جایگاه برنامه ریزانِ علم گرا و فن گرای کنونی کشور را بررسی و ضرورت تغییر روش برنامه ریزی، به روشهای اجتماع محور و سیاست محور را یادآوری کند و برنامه ریزان را به بازتعریف جایگاه خود در برنامه ریزی دعوت نماید. در این مقاله تلاش شده است ابتدا از طریق مطالعات اسنادی انتقادهای اصلی واردشده بر برنامه ریزی فنی و سنتی که برنامه ریزی غالب در کشور است، بررسی شود و سپس این انتقادها در روند مطالعات کشور مورد کنکاش قرار گیرند. ازآنجایی که بخش عمده ای از مطالعات کشور توسط شرکت های مهندسان مشاور، صورت می گیرد؛ از طریق مصاحبه با مدیران عامل بزرگترین شرکت های مهندسین مشاور کشور، چالشهای پییش روی برنامه ریزان مورد تجزیه وتحلیل قرارگرفته است. این مطالعه نشان می دهد نقش برنامه ریزان در بین اضلاع اصلی جامعه یعنی دولت و اجتماع جانبدارانه، ناقص و پرایراد است، برداشتهای برنامه ریزان از برنامه ریزی نیز بسیار ناپخته، یخ زده و تغییرنیافته است و برنامه ریزی به واسطه ویژگی جانبدارانه و درونی شده در درون ساختار دولت یک طرفه و کاسب کارانه شکل گرفته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Planners’ Position in the Iranian Urban Planning Process

نویسندگان [English]

  • m s 1
  • j t 2
  • m ch 3
چکیده [English]

Despite the fundamental economic, social, political and technological transformations, urban planning process has not undergone any sensible change since 1968 to the present time and the role and position of planners and its prominent actor, i.e. the government, have remained invariant. A major part of this change has resulted from the viewpoint held by planners who see the planning process as a technical, physical and intellectual process. In the present study, using concepts such as “knowledge”, “reality”, “rationality”, “value”, and “policy” an attempt has been made to criticize the traditional planning process, which is the dominant process in Iran. This study, by introducing other alternatives of scientific knowledge and instrumental rationality and exhibiting some gaps in the robust framework of the reality emphasized in traditional planning, addresses the role of values, experience, and mentality of planners as well as policy and policy implementation employed by social activists in the planning process. Furthermore, it reviews the unbiased and value-free perceptions of traditional values.  For this purpose, through interviewing the managing directors of the country’s largest consulting engineering companies, which are in charge of preparing designs in Iran, we have investigated their various mentalities, perceptions, and experiences about the forces and approaches influencing the planning process. The reason why we have chosen company directors instead of project managers or design experts is that directors are more involved in the interactions with different actors in the planning process. After conducting the interviews with 15 managing directors, the contents of the interviews were scripted and the results were applied to review the framework of traditional planning process. Since government, in contrast to society, holds all the powers and fulfills all the duties and is involved in almost all urban planning processes, by drawing five abstract states of planners’ positions (governmental planners, government-serving planners, independent planners, public-serving planners, and public planners) we have assumed that there is a distance between the two main sides of society (government and community) where planners find an angled position with these two elements of society. By defining this position, planners in the planning process determine their relations with each of the primary forces where the smaller the angle, the closer the relationships.  

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Planners’ Position
  • Urban Planning
  • Traditional Planning
  • government
  • Iran
 • Albrechts Louis(2013) Reframing strategic spatial planning by using a coproduction perspective, Planning

Theory 12,p 46-63
• Albrechts, Louis,(2003), Reconstructing Decision- Making: Planning Versus Politics, Planning Theory 2: 249
• Albrechts, Louis. 1991. Changing Roles and Positions of Planners. Urban Studies 28 (1):123-137.
• Allmendinger, P. (2005) Towards a Post-Positivist Typology of Planning Theory, Persian translation by Taqizade, Journal of Plan and Project, No. 92, pp. 51-80
• Allmendinger, P. (2010) Planning Theory, Persian translation by Bahman Teymouri, 1st edition Azarakhsh
• Azad Armaki, T., Lajevardi, H. (2003) Hermeneutics:Reconstruction and Dialogue, Periodical of Social
Sciences, No. 21, October 2003, pp. 93-112.
• Barati, N., (2006). Challenges Faced by Urbanism in Iran at the Beginning of the 21st Century, Baq e Nazar Journal, 3rd time, No. 6, winter 2006.
• Bonnie J. Johnson(2009) City Planners, Professional Culture, and Public Service Motivation, Journal of Planning Education and Research
• Booher, David E and Innes, Judith E (2002) Network Power in Collaborative Planning, Journal of Planning
Education and Research, 21: 221
• Brooks, Michael P. 2002. Planning Theory for Practitioners. Chicago, IL: Planners Press.Camilleri, Emanuel. 2007. Antecedents Affecting Public Service Motivation. Personnel Review 36 (3):356-377.
• Compbell, S. and Fainstein, S (2009 )Structure and problems of planning theory, in readings in planning theory, edited by Compbell, S. and Fainstein, S. Persian translation by Aqvami Moqadam, A., 1st edition,
Azarakhsh Publication
• Creswell, J. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and Research design,choosingfive approaches Persian translation by Danaeifard, H., and Kazemi, H. 1st edition, Saffar Publication
• Dabinett, Gordon and Richardson, Tim(1999) The European Spatial Approach: The Role of Power and Knowledge in Strategic Planning and Policy Evaluation, Evaluation1999 5:220
• Davidoff, P (2012) Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning, Persian translation by Shafiei A., Abadname Journal, No. 3, pp. 60-78
• Ejlali, P., Rafieyan, M. Asgari, A. (2012). Theory of Planning: Traditional and Modern Views, 1st edition,
Nashr-e Agah.
• Etzioni, E.(2012) Mixed Scanning: Third approach to Decision Making, Persian translation by Mehdizade, H.,
and Azad, M., Abadane Periodical, Fall 2012, No. 5, pp. 122-133.
• Fainstein, Susan(2005) Planning Theory and the City, Journal of Planning Education and Research 2005 25: 121
• Faludi, A (2012) Critical Rationalism and PlanningMethodology, Persian translation by jalali, A., Abadname Journal, No. 3, pp. 60-78
• Farivar sadri(2014)Changes in urban planning of Iran, 1nd edition, Architecture and Urbanism Publication
• Flyvbjerg, Bent(2002) Bringing Power to Planning Research : One Researcher’s Praxis Story, Journal of Planning Education and Research 2002 21: 353
• Forester, John(2013)On the theory and practice of critical pragmatism:Deliberative practice and creative negotiations, Planning Theory 2013 12: 5
• Fox-Rogers Linda and Murphy Enda(2014) Informal strategies of power in the local planning system, Planning Theory 13: 244
• Friedman, J (2008) Planning in Public Domain: From knowledge to action, Persian translation by Aqvami Moqadam, A. 1st edition, Study and Research Center for Urbanism and Architecture
• Friedman, J. (2009) Toward a Non-Euclidean Mode of Planning, in readings in planning theory, edited by Compbell, S. and Fainstein, S. Persian translation by Aqvami Moqadam, A., 1st edition, Azarakhsh Publication
• Groth, Jacqueline and Corijn,Eric(2005) Reclaiming Urbanity: Indeterminate Spaces, Informal Actors and Urban Agenda Setting, Urban Studies 2005 42: 503
• Harvey, D. (2009) On planning the ideology of planning, in readings in planning theory, edited by Compbell, S. and Fainstein, S. Persian translation by Aqvami Moqadam, A., 1st edition, Azarakhsh Publication
• Harvey, D. (2013). Urban Experience, Persian translation by Aqvami Moqadam, A. 1st edition, Pejvak Publications.
• Hiller, J. (2009) Shadows of power: an allegory of prudence in Land- Use planning, Persian translation by Pouladi, K. 1st edition, Association of Consulting Engineers Publications

• Innes, J., (2012). Reducing the Distance between Theory and Practice of Planning, Persian translation by Shafiei, Abadname Periodical, No. 5, Fall 2012, pp. 1-24.
• Innes, Judith E., and David E. Booher. 2000. Public Participation in Planning: New Strategies for the 21st Century. In Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning. Atlanta, GA.
• Irazábal Clara(2009) Realizing Planning’s Emancipatory Promise: Learning From Regime Theory To Strengthen Communicative Action, Planning Theory 8: 115-139
• ISNA News Agency A (2006) Detailed Report of the Second Review Workshop for Tehran Master Plan, Released on: 28th July, http://isna.ir/fa/print/8505-14515.43643
• ISNA News Agency B (2006) Dr. Barati’s Response to the Organization for Preparation of Tehran Master and Detailed Plans, Released on 8th January http://isna.ir/fa/news/8510-087
• klosterman, R., A. (2009) Arguments For and Against Planning, in readings in planning theory, edited by Compbell, S. and Fainstein, S. Persian translation by Aqvami Moqadam, A., 1st edition, Azarakhsh Publication
• Maatouf, S. (2004). Analyzing the Reconstruction Planning of Abadan and Khoramshahr from Theoretical Perspectives, Baq-I Nazar Periodical, No. 1
• Maatouf, S., (2006). Theoretical Challenges in Reconstruction of Khoramshahr, the Third Congress of Architecture and Urbanism History, Organization of Cultural Heritage, Vol. II, pp. 67-86
• MacLeod, Gordon and Jones, Martin(2011) Renewing Urban Politics, Urban Studies 48: 2443
• Mehdizade, J. (2006). Strategic Planning of Urban Development of the Recent Universal Experiences and its Position in Iran, 2nd edition, Architecture and Urbanism Publication
• Miraftab, F.( 2009) Insurgent planning: Situating radical planning in the Global South, Planning Theory 8 (1)
• Ozer, A. (2007). Government in the Western Thought, Persian translation by Bagheri, A. 1st edition, Farzan Publication.
• Perry, James L., and Lois Recascino Wise. 1990. The Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review 50 (3):367-373

• Pløger, John,(2004), Strife: Urban Planning and Agonism, Planning Theory 3(1): 71-92
• Samsura, D. Ary A., Krabben, Erwin van der, Deemen, A.M.A. van, (2010)A game theory approach to the analysis of land and property development processes, Land Use Policy, Volume 27, 564-578
• Shokoei, H. (2003), Critical Rationalism and Methodology of Planning, gitashenasi Publication, tehran
• Siemiatycki, Matti,(2012) The Role of the Planning Scholar: Research, Conflict, and Social Change, Journal of Planning Education and Research 32: 147
• Vasu, Michael Lee. 1979. Politics and Planning: A National Study of American Planners. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Pres