Volume 36, Issue 2 (2021)
GeoRes 2021, 36(2): 125-136 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2020/09/8 | Accepted: 2020/11/12 | Published: 2021/06/16
Received: 2020/09/8 | Accepted: 2020/11/12 | Published: 2021/06/16
Rights and permissions
1- Department of Urban planning, Faculty of Arts and Architecture, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran
2- Department of urban planning, Iran Science and Technology University, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of urban planning, Iran Science and Technology University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract (7201 Views)
Aims: Today, the inconsistencies range of last seven decades planning and urban plans which were due to the lack of formulating an indigenous theory base on the Iran's planning environment characteristics, are visible. Achieving to the interacted urban planning theory with the official structural elements of Iran’s planning environment is the research aim.
Methodology: This is a qualitative research with the critical approach. "Classical Grounded theory" is the foundation of research provision. Targeted semi-structured interviews with 30 experts and documentary research of 100 published scientific and research documents (1991-2020) provided the data that coded by the MAXQDA software. The research validity was confirmed by reviewing the literature and "Assessment with the seven criteria of Strauss and Corbin" and "Assessment with the Cresol questions".
Findings: In the data linking (860 open cods) and conceptualizing process of this research, with "autographs" and the participation of interviewees, the basic codes of "macro-planning structure", "theories and theoretical frameworks" and "planning environment" were identified. The official planning structure and "the elements of the official urban planning structure" and the basic code of "coordination model of the official planning structure elements" and three basic categories of: "incoordination and inconsistency in the process of providing and implementation the plan", "inconsistency and incoordination of theoretical frameworks of planning model" and "incoordination In the urban governance" with using the "graph model" was clarified.
Conclusion: The research showed: the "coordination" concept is the codes and categories central core which lead to the interacted planning theory with the elements of the official structure of Iran’s planning environment. The focal phenomenon that shows "the theory of this research" is "coordinated planning" with the strategies of: "theoretical guidance for organizing a coordinated planning process" and "practical guidance for coordinating the role, viewpoint, interaction, etc. of institutions and users involved in planning".
Methodology: This is a qualitative research with the critical approach. "Classical Grounded theory" is the foundation of research provision. Targeted semi-structured interviews with 30 experts and documentary research of 100 published scientific and research documents (1991-2020) provided the data that coded by the MAXQDA software. The research validity was confirmed by reviewing the literature and "Assessment with the seven criteria of Strauss and Corbin" and "Assessment with the Cresol questions".
Findings: In the data linking (860 open cods) and conceptualizing process of this research, with "autographs" and the participation of interviewees, the basic codes of "macro-planning structure", "theories and theoretical frameworks" and "planning environment" were identified. The official planning structure and "the elements of the official urban planning structure" and the basic code of "coordination model of the official planning structure elements" and three basic categories of: "incoordination and inconsistency in the process of providing and implementation the plan", "inconsistency and incoordination of theoretical frameworks of planning model" and "incoordination In the urban governance" with using the "graph model" was clarified.
Conclusion: The research showed: the "coordination" concept is the codes and categories central core which lead to the interacted planning theory with the elements of the official structure of Iran’s planning environment. The focal phenomenon that shows "the theory of this research" is "coordinated planning" with the strategies of: "theoretical guidance for organizing a coordinated planning process" and "practical guidance for coordinating the role, viewpoint, interaction, etc. of institutions and users involved in planning".
References
1. Abdi Daneshpour Z, Ebrahimnia V (2015). Opportunities and barriers to applying a collaborative approach in establishing an integrated policy-making structure in Tehran. Soffe. 25(1):85-118. [Persian] [Link]
2. Afsari A, Seyed Al-Hosseini SM, Daneshvar M, Seghatoleslami A (2019). Designing a model for controlling and handling the power exercising environment for urban panning process based on grounded theory; a Case Study of Mashhad Metropolis. Geographical Researches. 34(4):517-526. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.29252/geores.34.4.517]
3. Ajlali P, Rafieian M, Asgari A (2017). Planning theories: traditional and new perspectives. Tehran: Agah Company Publication. [Persian] [Link]
4. Archibugi F (2013). Planning theory: From the political debate to the methodologicalreconstruction. Translated by Malekpourasl, Behzad. Tehran: Armanshaher Company Publication. [Persian] [Link]
5. Barati N (2006). Challenges have to be faced in the context of urbanism in Iran at the beginning of the 21th century. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-E Nazar. 3(6):5-29. [Persian] [Link]
6. Danaeifard H, Emami S (2007). Strategies of qualitative research: A reflection on grounded theory. Strategic Management Thought, 1(2):69-97. [Persian] [Link]
7. Elyaszadeh Moghaddam N (2011). Surveying and feasibility of replacement of structural-strategic model with urban comprehensive planning model in Iran. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development. 4(6):35-48. [Persian] [Link]
8. Faludi A (1973). Planning Theory. Oxford: Pergamon Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/B978-0-08-017066-4.50005-9]
9. Faludi A (2000). The performance of spatial planning. Planning Practice and Research. 15(4):299-318. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/713691907]
10. Farhangi A, Karoubi M, Saadeghvaziri F (2015). Classic grounded theory; Description of generating gravity center of Iranian health tourism brand identity theory. Journal of Business Management. 7(1):145-162. [Persian] [Link]
11. Habibi K, Behzad Far M, Meshkini A, Alizadeh H, Mahaki W (2011). Evaluating the impacts of urban development plans on deconstruction and quality improvement of ancient Iranian space. Islamic Iranian Quarterly. 4:15-28. [Persian] [Link]
12. Haieri Yazdi A, Maleki A (2017). And again, public policy. Strategic Studies of public policy. 7(24):11-20. [Persian] [Link]
13. Husseinzadeh Dalir K, Pourmohammadi MR, Soltani A (2011). Investigating the influencing factors on the inefficiency of Iranian master plans (Case Study: Tabriz Master Plans). Geography and Planning (Tabriz University). 15(31):131-151. [Persian] [Link]
14. Husseinzadeh Dalir K, Sadr Mousavi M, Heydari Chinay R, Rezatabe S (2012). An introduction to the new approach of urban development strategy (CDS) on the urban planning process with emphasis on the challenges of master plans in Iran. Geographical Space Journal. 11(36):173-210. [Persian] [Link]
15. Kazemian G, Jalili M (2015). Key stakeholders power analysis of policy making process in Tehran's strategic-structural (Comprehensive) Plan (1999-2011). Architecture and Urban Plannig Journal. 8(15):139-158. [Persian] [Link]
16. Majedi H (2013). Structural -strategic planning theory. Hoviatshahr. 6(11):17-26. [Persian] [Link]
17. Malekpour B, Alimohammadi M, Katoozian S (2012). The proposed outline issues in Strategic planning for urban revitalization and comparative comparison the theoretical framework and its usage requirements for Tehran strategic-structural planning. Haftshahr. 3(41-42):36-57. [Persian] [Link]
18. Moghimi A (2015). Future epistemology of theoretical approaches to urban planning, architecture and building industry. Urban and Rural Management. 14(38):75-104. [Persian] [Link]
19. Nazemi Gh, Rezazadeh R, Saghatoleslami A, Sarvari H (2020). Evaluation of the application of the "Master plan model" in Iranian urban planning environment. Geographical Researches. 35(4):377-386. [Persian] [Link]
20. Pour Ahmad A, Hataminejad H, Hosseini S (2006). Pathology of urban development plans in Iran. Geographical Research. 38(58):167-180. [Persian] [Link]
21. Rajab Salahi H, Taghvaie M, Zarabi A (2019). Analysis of the impact indicators on implementation of integrated urban management (Case Study: Tehran Metropolis). Urban Management. 18(54): 261-282. [Persian] [Link]
22. Salehi E (2007). The role of urban planning rules and regulations in the realization of a good city and sustainable urban development, Case study: Tehran. Journal of Environmental Studies. 32(40):51-62. [Persian] [Link]
23. Sarrafi M, Tavakkolinia J, Chamani moghaddam M (2014). Planners' position in the Iranian urban planning process. Motaleate Shahri. 3(12): 19-32. [Persian] [Link]
24. Sarvar R, Sharif Jahed S, Tavakkolan A (2015). Ranking of Tehran urban development plans based on planning principles. Geography. 13(46):155-179. [Persian] [Link]
25. Seyed- al hoseini S, Habib F, Majedi H (2012). Application of design-based planning as interactional approach in macro and micro scale plans. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-E Nazar. 9(22):45-54. [Persian] [Link]
26. Watson V (2009). The planned city sweeps the poor away...': Urban planning and 21st century urbanisation. Progress in Planning. 72(3):151-193. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.progress.2009.06.002]
27. Zangi Abadi A, Abdullahi M, Salek Ghahforkhi R, Qasemzadeh B (2013). Evaluation of factors influencing the implementation of urban master plans in Iran and there challenges (Case Study: Historical-Cultural Axis of District 6 of Tabriz). Urban Planning and Research. 5(18):41-58. [Persian] [Link]