Persian
Language
Geographical Research is Published in Persian Fulltext.
Volume 34, Issue 4 (2019)
GeoRes 2019, 34(4): 517-526 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2019/07/4 | Accepted: 2019/09/11 | Published: 2020/02/25
Received: 2019/07/4 | Accepted: 2019/09/11 | Published: 2020/02/25
How to cite this article
afsari A, Seyed Al-Hosseini S M, daneshvar M, Seghatoleslami A. Designing a Model for Controlling and Handling the Power Exercising Environment for Urban Planning Process Based on Grounded Theory; a Case Study of Mashhad Metropolis. GeoRes 2019; 34 (4) :517-526
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-763-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-763-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Authors
Ahamd Afsari *1, Seyed moslem Seyed Al-Hosseini1, Maryam Daneshvar1, Amidoleslam Seghatoleslami1
1- Department of Urban design and planning, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran
Abstract (2402 Views)
Aims & Backgrounds: Lack of readings of concepts such as power has caused irreparable damages to the body of cities. In Iran, due to the domination of traditional viewpoint of planning, this concept has not paid much attention. An urban power exercising environment, deviating from the expected process, in addition to cause the domination of the powerful people on urban topics, has marginalized the local community with the least impact and has impressed the physical structure of the city. This study attempts to explore the unknown dominant dimensions in the Mashhad metropolis by examining the power exercising environment governing the planning process of urban development designs (including preparation, approval and implementation) in order to control and handle it, and provides a suitable model by understanding these processes.
Methodology: This paper, based on the grounded theory approach, examines its various dimensions through three types of open, axial, and selective coding.
Findings: On this basis, after clarifying the concept of Controlling and Handling the Power Exercising Environment, the results of a total of 20 interviews 84 identifiers, with 27 concepts and 5 categories was achieved.
Conclusion: The results of this research showed that the Controlling and Handling the Power Exercising Environment model is identified by expressing 5 categories in deterrent factors, factors, the intervening conditions of executive, consequences and finally, were presented as a conceptual and strategic framework.
Methodology: This paper, based on the grounded theory approach, examines its various dimensions through three types of open, axial, and selective coding.
Findings: On this basis, after clarifying the concept of Controlling and Handling the Power Exercising Environment, the results of a total of 20 interviews 84 identifiers, with 27 concepts and 5 categories was achieved.
Conclusion: The results of this research showed that the Controlling and Handling the Power Exercising Environment model is identified by expressing 5 categories in deterrent factors, factors, the intervening conditions of executive, consequences and finally, were presented as a conceptual and strategic framework.
Keywords:
References
1. Afsari A, Seyed Al-Hosseini SM, Daneshvar M, Seghatoleslami A (2019). Evaluating and measuring the rate of access to public services using fuzzy model case study: Mashhad metropolis. Journal of Geographical Researches. 34(1):51-61. [Persian] [DOI:10.29252/geores.34.1.51]
2. Allmendinger P, Gunder M (2005). Applying lacanian insight and a dash of derridean deconstruction to planning's 'dark side'. Planning Theory. 4(1):87-112. [DOI:10.1177/1473095205051444]
3. Bryman A (2011). Quantity and quality in social research. Aghabigpouri H, translator. Tehran: Sociologists Publications. [Persian]
4. Castells M (2009). Communication power. New York:Oxford University Press.
5. Chen X, Sun J (2006). Sociological perspectives on urban China: From familiar territories to complex terrains. China Information. 20(3):519-551. [DOI:10.1177/0920203X06070041]
6. Corbin JM, Strauss AL (2008). Basics of qualitative research:Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [DOI:10.4135/9781452230153]
7. Creswell JW (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA :Sage.
8. Delavar A (2010). Qualitative Methodology. Rahbord Journal. 19(54): 307-329
9. Fainstein S S (2005). Planning theory and the city. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 25(2):121-130. [DOI:10.1080/14649350500185233]
10. Flyvbjerg B (2002). Bringing power to planning research: One researcher's praxis story. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 21(4):353-366. [DOI:10.1177/0739456X0202100401]
11. Forester J (2013). On the theory and practice of critical pragmatism: Deliberative practice and creative negotiations. Planning theory. 12(1):5-22. [DOI:10.1177/1473095212448750]
12. Fox-Rogers L, Murphy E (2014). Informal strategies of power in the local planning system. Planning Theory. 13(3):244-268. [DOI:10.1177/1473095213492512]
13. Harvey D (1996). Social Justice and the City. Haeri M, Hesamiyan F, Monadizade B, translator. Tehran: Sherkate Pardazesh-e Barnamerizi Shahri Publications. [Persian]
14. Hillier J (2010). Shadows of power: An allegory of prudence in land-use planning. Pauladi K, translator. Tehran: Iran Consulting Engineers Society Publications. [Persian]
15. M (2016). A game theory approach to the analysis of urban power games: Analysis of construction building processes in Tehran metropolis. HONAR-HA-YE-ZIBA MEMARI-VA-SHAHRSAZI. 21(1):91-100. [Persian]
16. Kamete AY (2012). Interrogating planning's power in an African city: Time for reorientation? Planning Theory. 11(1):66-88. [DOI:10.1177/1473095211419116]
17. Kong L (2008). In The sage companion to the city. In: Hall T, Hubbard P, Short R, editors. Power and Prestige. London: Sage. 13-27. [DOI:10.4135/9781446211694.n2]
18. Lashgari E, Rezaei M, Kaviyanpoor G (2017). Theoretical explanation of functions of political power in urban space. Journal of Geographical Research. 32(2):52-66. [Persian] [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.geores.32.2.52]
19. Kazemian G, Jalili J (2015). Key stakeholders power analysis of policy making process in Tehran's strategic structural (Comprehensive) plan (1999-2011). Journal of Architecure and Urban Planning. 8(15):139-158. [Persian]
20. Lefebvre H (2001). Comments on a new state form. Antipode. 33(5):769-782. [DOI:10.1111/1467-8330.00216]
21. Lennon M, Fox-Rogers L (2017). Morality, power and the planning subject. Planning Theory. 16(4):364-383. [DOI:10.1177/1473095216648185]
22. McGuirk PM (2000). Power and policy networks in urban governance: Local government and property-led regeneration in Dublin. Urban Studies. 37(4):651-672. [DOI:10.1080/00420980050003955]
23. Moulaert F, Cabaret K (2006). Planning, networks and power relations: Is democratic planning under capitalism possible?. Planning Theory. 5(1):51-70. [DOI:10.1177/1473095206061021]
24. Navabakhsh M, Karimi F (2009). Analysis of the concept of power in Michel Foucault's theorie. Quarterly of Political Studies. 1(3):49-64. [Persian]
25. Ashraf Nazari A (2005). Power analysis from the perspective of Štefan Lux: Power from a pluralist, reformist, and radical look. Rahbord Journal. 36:383-392. [Persian]
26. Ozer A (2007). The government in the history of Western thought. Bagheri A, translator. Tehran: Farzan Publishing. [Persian]
27. Pacione M (2013). Urban geography: A global perspective. 3 rd ed. London: Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203023525]
28. Parker S (2010). Cities, politics & power. London: Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203018286]
29. Richardson T, Jensen OB (2003). Linking discourse and space: Towards a cultural sociology of space in analysing spatial policy discourses. Urban Studies. 40(1):7-22. [DOI:10.1080/00420980220080131]
30. Schmidt-Thomé K, Mäntysalo R (2014). Interplay of power and learning in planning processes: A dynamic view. Planning Theory. 13(2):115-135. [DOI:10.1177/1473095213490302]
31. Tavakolinia J, Shams Pouya MK (2016). An analysis to the evolution of power and sovereignty with an emphasis on the issues of urban power. International Journal of Geographical Society of Iran. 14(50):73-92. [Persian]
32. Warf B (1991). Power, politics, and locality. Urban Geography.12(6):563-569. [DOI:10.2747/0272-3638.12.6.563]
33. Yusefi A, Varshoei S (2011). Social inequality in Mashhad urban space: An estimation of education and income inequality in Urban Spaces. Journal of Iranian Social Studies. 4(4):152-184. [Persian]
34. Zamiran M (2002). Michel foucault: Knowledge and power 6th ed. Tehran: Hermes Publications. [Persian]
35. ng of component in the traditional Iranian market, case study: Comparative comparison of Kashan traditional market and safavid commercial complex of Kashan. Urban Management Quarterly. 14(40):159-176. [Persian]
36. Ahmadi F, Aghalatifi A, Afshar A (2014). Factors influencing a sense of belonging in the regeneration of noghan neighborhood in the residential fabric near the Imam Reza Shrine. Journal of the Urban Development and Organization Haft Shahr. 4(47-48):70-84. [Persian]
37. Arbab P, Azizi MM, Zebardast ES (2016). Explanation of the key criteria of the process of Place-Identity formation in new urban development. Fine Arts Journal. 20(4):5-20. [Persian]
38. Low S, Altman I (1992). Place attachment. In: Altman I, Low SM, editors. Place Attachment. human behavior and environment (advances in theory and research), (Vol 12). Boston, MA: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_1 [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_8]
39. Canter D (1977). The psychology of place (Vol 1). 1st ed. London: The Architectural Press Ltd.
40. Droseltis O, Vignoles V (2010). Towards an integrative model of place identification: Dimensionality and predictors of intrapersonal-level place preferences. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 30(1):23-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.05.006]
41. Falahat MS (2006). Concept of sense of place and its constituent factors. Fine Arts Journal. 1(26):57-66. [Persian]
42. Giddens A (1991). Modernity and self - Identity: Self and society in the late modern age (Vol 1). 1st ed. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
43. Gustafson P (2001). Meaning of place: Very day experience and theorethical conceptualization. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 21(1):5-16 [DOI:10.1006/jevp.2000.0185]
44. Habibi D, Habibi D, Kasalaei A, Gorjipoor F, Tavakoli M (2018). Explaining the sense of belonging to place and identity in urban spaces with an emphasis on traditional markets. Architecture. 1(3):1-8. [Persian]
45. Habibi H (2014). Tabriz Grand Bazaar. 1st ed. Tehran: Bonyad
Send email to the article author