رویکردی داده بنیاد بر کاربست برنامه‌‌های ساختاری- راهبردی در نظام شهرسازی ایران

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران، تهران، ایران.

2 استاد گروه برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

3 استاد شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

امروزه برنامه‌ریزی دیگر صرفاً به‌عنوان حرفه‌ای علمی، فنی و یا وظیفه‌ای دولتی و حکومتی تلقی نمی‌شود؛ بلکه به مثابه پلی است که برنامه‌ریزان را در ارتباط با تغییرات نهادی قرار می‌دهد. به عبارت دیگر نظریه برنامه‌ریزی در خلاء اجتماعی، اقتصادی و یا سیاسی شکل نمی‌گیرند، بلکه به وسیله افراد و در موقعیت‌های اجتماعی با هدف تبیین وضع موجود و تجویز رویه‌ها و فرآیند مناسب‌تر صورت‌بندی می‌شود. این پژوهش با هدف معرفی توان تبیینی و تجویزی برنامه‌های ساختاری- راهبردی در بستر نهادگرایی به‌منظور ارتقاء ظرفیت کاربست آن در نظام شهرسازی ایران صورت پذیرفته‌است. به این منظور از روش نظریه‌پردازی داده بنیاد به‌عنوان راهبرد پژوهش بهره گرفته‌ شده‌ است. ابزارهای جمع‌آوری داده‌ها در این پژوهش مطالعات اسنادی و کتابخانه‌ای، مصاحبه با کارشناسان، مدیران و صاحب‌نظران و مشاهده مشارکتی در محیط تحقیق بوده و مشتمل بر دو سطح کلان و خرد معرفی می‌باشد. در سطح کلان، شرایط و مؤلفه‌های نظام شهرسازی ایران، با جامعیتی فراگیر مورد توجه بوده و در سطح خرد، نمونه‌کاوی با هدف بررسی مقیاس محلی برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری در طرح توسعه و عمران شهر مشهد انجام شده‌است. در نتیجه این تحلیل‌ها، در ارتباط با نظام شهرسازی ایران و برنامه‌های ساختاری- راهبردی 159 مفهوم و 44 مقوله و نه مقوله کلان در شش سرفصل با استفاده از روش کد‌گذاری بازشناسی شد. از بین مقوله‌های شناسایی شده، نهادگرایی در برنامه‌های ساختاری- راهبردی به‌عنوان مقوله محوری انتخاب و مدل پارادایمی با تأکید بر شرایط علّی، زمینه‌ای، مداخله‌گر و راهبردها و پیامدها ترسیم شد. بر پایه این مدل تحلیلی، برنامه‌ریزی ساختاری- راهبردی به‌عنوان چارچوب گفتمان و در ارتباط با بسیج اجتماعی و در بستر تغییرات نهادی، شرایط را به‌منظور توسعه در مقیاس‌ها و سطوح مختلف فراهم می‌سازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Grounded Theory Approach to the Application of Structural-Strategic Plans in Iran’s Urban Planning Syste

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maryam Daneshvar 1
  • Ali Ghaffari 2
  • Hamid Majedi 3
1 Ph.D. of Urban Planning, Department of Urbanism, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Professor of Urban Design, Department of Urban Planning and Design, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
3 Professor of Urban Planning, Department of Urbanism, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, BIslamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Nowadays, planning is no more is considered as a scientific and technical profession or a governmental and state duty rather it is envisioned as a bridge connecting the planners to the institutional changes. In other words, the planning theory is not formed within social, economic and/or political considerations rather it is configured by the individuals in social situations with the objective of elaborating the current status and prescribing of more appropriate procedures and processes. The present study has been conducted with the objective of introducing the elaborative and prescriptive power of the structural-strategic programs on the institutionalism grounds for the enhancement of the capacity of their application in Iran’s urban planning system. To do so, grounded theory has been utilized as the study strategy. The data collection instruments of the present study are documentary and library research, interviews with the experts, managers and specialists and participatory observation in the study environment; the instruments are composed of two micro- and macro-levels. In the latter level, Iran’s urban planning system’s conditions and indicators are taken into account with a pervasive comprehensiveness; in the former level, the sample evaluation is carried out with the objective of investigating the local scales of urban planning and management in the development and civil planning of the city of Mashhad. Following these analyses, 159 concepts and 44 topics and 9 meta-topics were identified in relation to Iran’s urban planning system and structural-strategic planning under six titles using a coding method. Amongst the identified topics, institutionalism was selected in the structural-strategic plans as the pivotal issue and the paradigmatic model was delineated with an emphasis on the causal, background and intervening conditions and strategies and outcomes. Based on this analytical model, the structural-strategic planning provides the prerequisites for the development of the scales and various levels as the discourse framework and in respect to the social mobilization.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Structural-Strategic Plans
  • Iran’s Urban Planning System
  • Plan of Mashhad
  • Institutionalism
  • Grounded theory

Afrosai, E. (2005). A Good Practice Guide to Enhance the Independence of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs).

Ahmadian, R. (2003). Feasibility of Using Structural-strategic Model in Iran’s Urban Planning System. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Islamic Azad University: Science and Research Branch. Tehran.

Albrechts, L. (2003). Planning and Power: Towards an Emancipatory Planning Approach. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21(6), 905-924. 

Albrechts, L. (2004). Strategic (Spatial) Planning Reexamined. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31(5), 743-758. 

Albrechts, L. (2006). Shifts in Strategic Spatial Planning? Some Evidence from Europe and Australia. Environment and Planning A, 38(6), 1149-1170. 

Albrechts, L., Alden, J., & Da Rosa, P.I.R.E.S.A. (2001). The Changing Institutional Landscape of Planning. 

Albrechts, L., Healey, P., & Kunzmann, K.R. (2003). Strategic Spatial Planning and Regional Governance in Europe. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(2), 113-129. 

Allmendinger, P. (2010). Planning Theory. (E. Teimouri, Trans.). Tehran. Azerakhsh.

Bryson, J. (2001). Intelligence by Design. (Doctoral Dissertation, Ph.D. Thesis, MIT).

Bryson, J.M. (2018). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational Achievement. John Wiley & Sons. 

Bryson, J.M., & Roering, W.D. (1988). Initiation of Strategic Planning by Governments. Public Administration Review, 48(6), 995. 

Bryson, J.M., & Roering, W.D. (1996). Strategic Planning Options for the Public Sector. Handbook of Public Administration, 2.

Campbell, S., & Fainstein, S.S. (Eds.). (2009). Readings in Planning Theory. (E. Aghvami Moghadam, Trans.). Tehran: Azerakhsh.

Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 146-166.

Daneshvar, M., & Bandar Abad, A. (2013). Studying about Adaptation New Master Plan with Specifications of Structural Strategic Plan; Case study: Mashhad’s Comprehensives Plan. Hoviatshahr, 14(7).

Faludi, A., & Altes, W.K. (1994). Evaluating Communicative Planning: a Revised Design for Performance Research. European Planning Studies, 2(4), 403-418. 

Forester, J. (1999). The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes. Mit Press. 

Friedmann, J. (2004). Strategic Spatial Planning and the Longer Range. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(1), 49-67. 

Grindle, M.S., & Hilderbrand, M.E. (1995). Building Sustainable Capacity in the Public Sector: what can be done? Public Administration and Development, 15(5), 441-463.

Hall, P.A., & Taylor, R.C. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936-957. 

Healey, P. (1997a). Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. UBc Press. 

Healey, P. (1997b). An Institutionalist Approach to Spatial Planning. Making Strategic Spatial Plans: Innovation in Europe, 21-36. 

Healey, P. (1999). Institutionalist Analysis, Communicative Planning, and Shaping Places. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 19(2), 111-121.

Healey, P. (2005). On the Project of Transformation’in the Planning Field: Commentary on the Contributions. Planning Theory, 4(3), 301-310.

Healey, P. (2006a). Urban Complexity and Spatial Strategies: Towards a Relational Planning for our Times. Routledge. 

Healey, P. (2006b). Transforming Governance: Challenges of Institutional Adaptation and a New Politics of space. European Planning Studies, 14(3), 299-320. 

Healey, P., Khakee, A., Motte, A., & Needham, B.E. (1997). Making Strategic Spatial Plans. Innovation in Europe. 

Innes, J.E., & Booher, D.E. (2003). Collaborative Policymaking: Governance through Dialogue. Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society, 33-59. 

Iran’s Municipalities Administrators. (1999). Designing Appropriate Methods for Preparing Urban Plans in Iran. Tehran.

Janin Rivolin, U. (2012). Planning Systems as Institutional Technologies: A Proposed Conceptualization and the Implications for Comparison. Planning Practice and Research, 27(1), 63-85. 

Kasper, W., & Streit, M.E. (1998). Institutional Economics–Cheltenham. Northampton: The Locke Institute.

Kaufman, J.L., & Jacobs, H.M. (1987). A Public Planning Perspective on Strategic Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53(1), 23-33. 

Khakee, A. (2002). Assessing Institutional Capital Building in a Local Agenda 21 Process in Go¨ teborg. Planning Theory & Practice, 3(1), 53-68. 

Kunzmann, K. (2000). Strategic Spatial Development through Information and Communication. 

Lee, J. (2001). A Grounded Theory: Integration and Internalization in ERP Adoption and Use. 

Majedi, H. (2010). Today Growth of Urbanization; Deteriorated Context of near Future. Hoviatshahr, 6(4).

Majedi, H. (2012). Structural– Strategic Planning Theory. Hoviatshahr, 11(6).

Management and Planning Organization of Iran. (1993). Evaluation of Comprehensive Urban Plans in Iran. Tehran.

Mashhoodi, S. (1996). Fluid Urban Plans. Tehran. Zista.

Ministry of Housing & Urban Development. (1999). Basics and Framework for Reviewing the Service Description of Urban Plans. Tehran.

Ministry of Housing & Urban Development. (2006). Strategic Planning of Urban Development. Tehran. Payam Cima.

Ministry of Housing & Urban Development. (2008). Modification of Urban Development Management System in Iran based on Strategic Approach. Tehran.

Mintzberg, H. (2000). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. Pearson Education. 

Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (2005). Strategy Safari: A Guided tour through the Wilds of Strategic Mangament. Simon and Schuster. 

Moradi Masihi, V. (2005). Strategic Planning and its Application in Urban Planning of Iran. Tehran. Prdazesh Barnamerizi Shahri.

Moroni, S. (2010). An Evolutionary Theory of Institutions and a Dynamic Approach to Reform. Planning Theory, 9(4), 275-297. 

North, D.C. (1994). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. (H. Xing, Trans.). Shanghai: SDX Joint Publishing Company. 

Poister, T.H., & Streib, G.D. (1999). Strategic Management in the Public Sector: Concepts, Models, and Processes. Public Productivity & Management Review, 308-325. 

Quinn, J.B. (1980). Managing Strategic Change. Sloan Management Review, 21(4), 3. 

Sager, T. (1994). Communicative Planning Theory. Avebury. 

Salet, W., & Faludi, A. (2000). Three Approaches to Strategic Spatial Planning. The Revival of Strategic Spatial Planning, 1-10. 

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded Theory Methodology. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 17, 273-85.

Wakely, P. (1997). Capacity Building for Better Cities. A Background Paper Prepared for Habitat II. Journal of the Development Planning Unit, University College London. Available at www. gdrc. org/uem/capacity-build. htm.

Watson, V. (2002). Do we Learn from Planning Practice? The Contribution of the Practice Movement to Planning Theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22(2), 178-187.