زمان پاسخگویی تنها روزهای زوج ساعت 10 الی 12  

   [Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: About :: Main :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 35, Issue 3 (2020) ::
GeoRes 2020, 35(3): 225-236 Back to browse issues page
Government Functional Place in Spatial Planning and Management within the Framework of Neoliberalism
Ehsan Lashgari Tafreshi *
Department of Geography, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran , ehsanlashgari80@yahoo.com
Abstract:   (552 Views)
Introduction: Since the 1980s, with the ever-increasing superiority of neoliberalism views and declining government investment in public affairs, the functional and ownership roles of the government in the economy have diminished and the role of non-governmental institutions, companies and forces in managing and producing space has increased, which weakened the independent influence of government-affiliated institutions in the management and planning of the territorial space. The purpose of this study was to present a new classification of government functions and how to study it in the management and planning of the territorial space in the framework of the neoliberal perspective with reference to valid theoretical documents. This research is of theoretical type and the data were collected by documentary and library methods and analyzed by descriptive-analytical method based on inferential approach.
Conclusion: Since spatial planning is affected by profit-oriented economic motivation based on free trade, the government lacks an independent position and function in spatial planning management. In this regard, government institutions seek to expand and continue the cycle of making more profitable talented areas and facilitate the faster return of capital through tax policies and coordination with the wishes of companies and economic institutions only through spatial management planning. In the formulation of land management policies by governments in the neoliberal model, different regions in the subdivision of the land level do not have the same value in attracting capital, and spatial polarization in population, movement, and activity in the territorial space will always exist. On this basis, land management in the neoliberal model has led to the importance of the concept of leveling, ranking, and decline of the concept of spatial justice, which is considered in the Keynesian model in land management studies.
Keywords: Neoliberalism, Government, Function, Spatial Planning
Full-Text [PDF 624 kb]   (10 Downloads)    
Article Type: Analytical Review | Subject: Political geography
Received: 2020/02/12 | Accepted: 2020/06/2 | Published: 2020/06/3
References
1. Abdekhodaei M (2015). Methods of exploring the modern state. Quarterly Journal of Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities. 21(84):87-115. [Persian]
2. Aden J, Morgan R (1974). Regional planning: a comprehensive view. Kingswood House: Leonard Hill Books.
3. Albrechts L (2003). Reconstructing decision making: Planning versus politics. Planning Theory Journal. 2(3):249-268. [DOI:10.1177/147309520323007]
4. Alem A (2006). Principles of political science. 2nd Edition. Tehran: Nashr-e Ney. [Persian]
5. Barghi Oskouei MM, Ashouri N, Ashouri A (2016). Globalization impact on government's tax revenues to its current expenditures (T/G) index. Journal of Tax Research. 24(30):11-40. [Persian]
6. Castells M (2001). Information age: economy, society and culture. Volume 2. Aligholian A, Khakbaz A, translators. Tehran: Tarh-e No. [Persian]
7. Clark I (2003). Globalization and international relations theory‭. Taghiloo F, translator. 1st Edition. Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publishing Center. [Persian] ‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
8. Dikec M (2012). Space as a mode of political thinking. Geoforum Journal. 4(43):669- 676. [DOI:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.01.008]
9. Ebrahimzadeh I, Mousavi M (2015). Principals of territorial spatial arrangement. 1st Edition. Tehran: SAMT Publications. [Persian]
10. Flanagan WG (1999). Urban sociology: image and structure. 3rd Edition. New York: Allyn and Bacon Press.
11. Friedman J (1987). Planning in public domain: from knowledge to action. 1st Edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
12. Garmany J (2016). Neoliberalism, governance, and the geographies of conditional cash transfers. Journal of political Geography. 50:61-70. [DOI:10.1016/j.polgeo.2015.10.003]
13. Hafeznia MR, Ahmadipour Z, Ghaderi Hajat M (2010). Politics and space. 1st Edition. Mashhad: Papli Publications. [Persian]
14. Harvey D (2007). A brief history of neoliberalism. Abdollahzadeh M, translator. 1st Edition. Tehran: Akhtaran. [Persian]
15. Harvey D (2008). The urbanization of capital. Aghvami Moghaddam A, translator. 1st Edition. Tehran: Akhtaran. [Persian]
16. Harvey D (2010). The Enigma of capital and the crisis of capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Harvey D, Merrifield A (2013). Right to city: urban origins of financial crises. Kalantari K, translator. 2nd Edition. Tehran: Mehr Vista Publications. [Persian]
18. Held D (2009). Restructuring global governance: cosmopolitanism, democracy and global order. Journal of International Studies. 37(3) 535-547. [DOI:10.1177/0305829809103231]
19. Hughes HS (1990). Awareness and society. Fouladvand E, translator. 1st Edition. Tehran: Islamic Revolution Publications. [Persian]
20. Jones M, Jones R, Woods M (2007). An introduction to political geography: space, place and politics. Pishgahifard Z, Akbari R, translators. 1st Edition. Tehran: University of Tehran Press. [Persian]
21. Kazemi AA (2011). Globalization of culture and politics: (a critical and epistemological analysis). 2nd Edition. Tehran: Nashr-e Ghomes. [Persian]
22. Keshavarz Shokri A (2015). The crisis of the capitalist welfare state: an analysis of the views of Claus Offe. Quarterly Studies The State. 1(1):133-174. [Persian]
23. Klosterman RA (1996). Arguments for and against planning. In: Campbell S, Fainstein SS, editors. Reading in planning theory. Cambridge, Mass, USA: Blackwell Publishers.
24. Lashgari Tafreshi E (2013). Global strategic places and regions. 1st Edition. Tehran: Entekhab Publications. [Persian]
25. Lashgari Tafreshi E (2016). Political power and geographic space, philosophical thinking about relationship between politics and space. 1st Edition. Tehran: Geopolitical Association of Iran. [Persian].
26. Lashgari Tafreshi E (2018). The evolution of theory and approaches in the philosophy of geography. 1st Edition. Yazd: Yazd University Press. [Persian]
27. Layder D (1997). Modern social theory: Key debates and new direction. London: UCL Press.
28. Lefebvre H (2017). The production of space. Trakame A, translator. Tehran: Nashr-e Tisa. [Persian]
29. Massey DB, Allen J, Sarre P (1999). Human geography today. Malden, Mass: Blackwell publisher.
30. Metzger J, Soneryd L, Hallström KT (2017). Power' is that which remains to be explained: Dispelling the ominous dark matter of critical planning studies. Planning Theory. 16(2):203-222. [DOI:10.1177/1473095215622502]
31. Mirheydar D, Mirahmadi F (2017). Development of thought in traditional and modern political geography. 1st Edition. Tehran: Tehran University Press. [Persian]
32. Mojtahedzadeh P (2002). Political geography and geopolitics‭. 1st Edition. Tehran: SAMT Publications. [Persian]‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
33. Moore M (2004). Revenue, State Formation and the quality of governance in developing countries. International Political Science Review. 25(3):297-319. [DOI:10.1177/0192512104043018]
34. Mosallanejad A (2016). Institutionalization and globalization. 2nd Edition. Tehran: Tehran University Press [Persian]
35. Mousavi Shafaei SM (2007). Theoretical conflicts in the international political economy. Journal of Law and Political Sciences. 2(4):107-122. [Persian]
36. Muller C (2005). Governance, democracy, and global politics in the globalization era. Samino L, translator. 1st Edition. Tehran: Akhtaran. [Persian]
37. Papoli Yazdi MH (2005). Social Fairness and development: the use of philosophy and ideology in spatial planning. Geographical Research Seasonal Journal. 19(74):51-77. [Persian]
38. Peck J (2006). Liberating the city: between New York and New Orleans. Urban Geography Journal. 27(8):681- 713. [DOI:10.2747/0272-3638.27.8.681]
39. Peck J, Tickell A (2005). Neoliberalizing space. Antipode Journal. 34(3):380-404. [DOI:10.1111/1467-8330.00247]
40. Peet R (2011). Inequality, crisis and austerity in finance capitalism. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. 4(3):383-399. [DOI:10.1093/cjres/rsr025]
41. Pierre J (1999). Models of urban governance: the institutional dimension of urban politics. Urban Affairs Review. 34(3):372-396. [DOI:10.1177/10780879922183988]
42. Piri I (2014). Systemic risk, Good governance and urban Excess accumulation Metropolitan challenges in the economy (Critique of the free market fundamentalism). Scientific-Research Quarterly of Geographical Data. 23(90):54-59. [Persian]
43. Pouladi K (2004). The history of political notions in the west. Volume 1. Tehran: Nashr-e Markaz. [Persian]
44. Rossi U, Vanollo A (2015). Urban political geographies: a global perspective. Valigholizadeh A, Karimi M, translators. Maragheh: Maragheh University Press. [Persian]
45. Sadeghi M, Javan J, Rahnama MR (2015). What is the geographical space? A thinking on the nature of the geographical space from the perspective of hermeneutic phenomenology. Journal of Arid Regions Geographic Studies. 5(19):12-28. [Persian]
46. Sadeghizadeh S (2015). Nation-state challenges in the age of globalization. Quarterly Studies The State. 1(2):111-134. [Persian]
47. Samiei M (2012). Origins and outcomes of ideological breakdown. Journal of world studies. 1(3):33-58. [Persian]
48. Shafiei Sabet N, Sedighi S (2016). Explanation of place commodification quality in capitalism system. Journal of Transformations in Human Science. 4(6):34-60. [Persian]
49. Shakouei H (2004). ‎New trends in philosophy of geography. Volume 2. Tehran: Gitashenasi Publications. [Persian]
50. Shankar JP (2006). The twilight of the nation- state, globalization, chaos and war. London: Pluto Press.
51. Short JR (2011). Urban theory: a critical assessment. Ziary K, Mahdnejad H, Parhiz F, translators. 2nd Edition. Tehran: Tehran University Press. [Persian]
52. Sleinis EE (1994). Nietzsche's Revolution of values. Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
53. Stubbs R, Underhill G (2006). Political economy and the changing global order. 3rd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. Tajbakhsh K (2007). The promise of the city: space, identity, and politics in contemporary political thoughts. 1st Edition. Tehran: Nashr-e Ney. [Persian]
55. Tankis F (2009). Space, the city and social theory: social relations and urban forms. Parsi H, Aflatooni A, translators. 1st Edition. Tehran: Tehran University Press. [Persian]
56. Wallerstein IM (2002). Historical capitalism. Naraghi Y, translator. 1st Edition. Tehran: Nashr-e Ghatreh. [Persian]
57. Zaki Y, Valigholeizadeh A (2015). Spatial scales in political geography (concepts and theories). 2nd Edition. Tehran: Tehran University Press. [Persian]
58. Zielnic A (2007). Space and social theory. 1st Edition. London: Sage Publisher
59. Zukin S (1995). The cultures of cities. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Lashgari Tafreshi E. Government Functional Place in Spatial Planning and Management within the Framework of Neoliberalism. GeoRes. 2020; 35 (3) :225-236
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-843-en.html


Volume 35, Issue 3 (2020) Back to browse issues page
فصلنامه تحقیقات جغرافیایی Geographical Researches Quarterly Journal
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4227