واکاوی دوگانگی های بنیادین در مفهوم خواست(مصلحت) عمومی در سیاست گذاری و برنامه ریزی شهری

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی، دانشکده هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

2 استاد گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

چکیده

مفهوم خواست/مصلحت عموم در طی دهه‌های گذشته، و در قالب مباحثات و مناظرات، همواره بعنوان یکی از بنیادی‌ترین پایه‌‌های مشروعیت عمل شهرسازی مطرح شده است. با این وجود، یکی از ضعف‌های مهم و قابل اشاره در راستا‌ی این امر، عدم شفافیت و روشنی این حوزه مفهومی است. به خصوص در زبان فارسی که حجم تولیدات در این زمینه نظری بسیار محدود و اغلب مربوط به رشته‌هایی همچون علوم و فلسفه سیاسی بوده است. در این پژوهش، ضمن تدوین چارچوبی کلی از تاریخچه این مفهوم در دانش و کُنش شهرسازی، با رویکردی کتابخانه‌ای-تحلیلی، بر کشف و اشاره به دوگانگی-های بنیادین مستتر در این عبارت، ایده و مفهوم تاکید شده است. روشن شدن این مسائل می‌تواند ضمن گسترش افق نظری علاقمندان به این حوزه، با رفع شکاف معرفتی ناشی از اتکا به تنها یک وجه و یک قطب از این دوگانگی‌ها، از بسیاری کج‌فهمی‌ها و به دنبال آن تعارضات نظری-عملی در این باب نیز جلوگیری نماید.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

An Analysis of the Foundational Dichotomies in Public Interest Concept in Urban Planning and Policy-Making

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ebrahim Zargari Marandi 1
  • Ali Soltani 2
1 Faculty of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2 Faculty of Art and Architecture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده [English]

The concept of ‘public interest’ over the past decades, and in the form of discussions and debates, has always been regarded as one of the most foundational bases serving the legitimation and justification of ‘urban planning’ and ‘policy making’ .Nevertheless, one of the important weaknesses in this regard is the lack of clarity and transparency of this conceptual domain. Especially in the Persian language, the literature in this theoretical field is highly limited and often related to disciplines such as political science and philosophy. In this study, after explaining a general history of this concept in knowledge and practice of urban planning using literature review and meta-analytical methodology, we focused on identifying and analyzing the foundational dichotomies inherent in this term and concept. The clarification of these issues, by extending the horizons of those interested in this field of research, can prevent the epistemic gap arising from merely relying on only one aspect of these dichotomies and from numerous misunderstandings and consequently contradictions in planning theory and practice.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • public interest
  • dichotomy
  • epistemic gap
  • urban planning
Alexander, E. R., 2002, The Public Interest in Planning: From legitimation to substansive plan evaluation, Planning Theory, 1(3), 226–249.

Alexander, E. R., 2006, Evaluation and Rationalities: Reasoning with Values in Planning, In: E. R. Alexander (ed.), Evaluation in Planning: Evolution and Prospects (39-53), Ashgate.

Alexander, E. R., 2007, Planning rights and their implications, Planning Theory, 6(2), 112-126.

Alexander, E. R., 2010, Planning, Policy and the Public Interest: Planning Regimes and Planners' Ethics and Practices, International Planning Studies, 15(2), 143-162.

Alexander, E. R., 2011, Evaluating Planning: What is successful planning and (how) can we measure it?, In: A. Hull, E. R. Alexander, A. Khakee and J. Woltjer (eds.), Evaluation for Participation and sustainability in planning (32-46), London and New York: Routledge.

Alexander, E. R., 2013, Values in Planning and Design: A Process Perspective on Ethics in Forming the Built Environment, In: C. Basta and S. Moroni (eds.), Ethics, Design and Planning of the Built Environment, Springer.

Alfasi, N., 2009, planning and the Public Interest: An editorial introduction, Geography Research Forum, 29, 1-6.

Arnstein, S., 1969, A Ladder of Citizen Participation, Journal of the American Planning Association [JAPA], 35(4), 216-224.

Baer, W., 1997, General Plan Evaluation Criteria: An Approach to Making Better Plans, Journal of the American Planning Association [JAPA], 63(3), 329-344.

Booth, P., 2003, planning by consent: the origins and nature of British development control, London and New York: Routledge.

Bozeman, B., 2007, Public Values and Public Interest: Counterbalancing Economic Individualism, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Burdette, J. T., 2004, Form-Based Codes: A Cure for the Cancer Called Euclidean Zoning? , Urban and Regional Planning Master Thesis, The faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Campbell, H. and Marshall, R., 2002, Utilitarianism's Bad Breath? A Re-Evaluation of the Public Interest Justification for Planning, Planning Theory, 1(2), 163–187.

Chettiparamb, A., 2015, Articulating ‘public interest’ through complexity theory, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 0(0), 1–22.

Čolić, N., 2016, The Changing Role of "The Public Interest" in Serbian Planning Practice, PhD Thesis, Heriot-Watt University.

Dahl, R. A., 1961, Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City, Yale University Press.

Davidoff, P. and Reiner, T. A., 1962, A Choice Theory of Planning, Journal of the American Institute of Planners [JAIP], 28(2), 103-115.

Davidoff, P., 1965, Advocacy and pluralism in planning, Journal of the American Institute of Planners 31(4), 331-338.

Etienne, H. F., 2014, what is Consistent with the Public Interest? Rethinking Planning Ethics for the 21st Century, Progressive Planning 198 (Winter), 20-21.

Etzioni, A., 1967, Mixed-Scanning: A Third Approach to Decision Making, Public Administration Review, 27(5), 385-392.

Faludi, A., 1989, Conformance vs. Performance: Implications for Evaluation, Impact Assessment, 7(2/3), 135-151

Forester, J., 1987, planning in the face of Conflict: Negotiation and Mediation Strategies in local Land Use Regulation, Journal of the American Planning Association [JAPA], 53(3), 303-314.

Forester, J., 1989, planning in the face of Power, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Forester, J., 2012, On the Theory and Practice of Critical Pragmatism: Deliberative Practice and Creative Negotiations, Planning Theory 12(1), 5-22.

Friedmann, J., 1966, Planning as Innovation: The Chilean Case, Journal of the American Institute of Planners [JAIP] 32(4), 194-204.

Friedmann, J., 1967, a Conceptual Model for the Analysis of Planning Behavior, Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(2), 225-252.

Friedmann, J., 1971, the Future of Comprehensive Urban Planning: A Critique, Public Administration Review, 31(3), 315-326.

Friedmann, J., 1973, Retracking America: A theory of Transactive Planning, Garden City (NY): Anchor Press-Doubleday.

Friedmann, J., 1989, Planning in the Public Domain: Discourse and Praxis, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 8(2), 128 - 130

Grant, J., 1994, on some Public uses of Planning ‘Theory’: Rhetoric and expertise in community planning dispute, Town Planning Review [TPR], 65(1), 59-78.

Grant, J., 2005, Rethinking the Public Interest as a planning concept, Plan [Journal of Canadian Institute of Planners: CIP], 48-50.

Habermas, J., 1988, Legitimation Crisis, T. Mccarthy (Trans.), Polity Press.

Hayek, Friedrich August von [F. A.], 2001, The Road to Serfdom, Routledge Classics, London and New York: Routledge [First published in 1944, London: George Routledge & Sons].

Healey, P., 1992, Planning through Debate: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory, the Town Planning Review [TPR], 63(2), 143-162.

Healey, P., 1997, Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies, London: Macmillan.

Hoch, C., 1988, Conflict at large: A National Survey of Planners and Political Conflict, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 7(4), 25-34.

Hoch, C., 2002, Evaluating Plans Pragmatically, Planning Theory, 1(1), 53-75.

House, E. R., 1980, Evaluation with Validity, London: Sage Publication.

Klosterman, R. E., 1980, A Public Interest Criterion, Journal of the American Planning Association [JAPA], 46(3), 323-333.

LeCorbusier [C.E. Jeaneret], 1973, the Athens Charter, Anthony Eardley (Trans.), New York: Grossman Publisher.

Lennon, M., 2017, on the‘Subject’ of Planning’s Public Interest, Planning Theory, 16(2), 150-168.

Lichfield, N., 1960, Cost-Benefit Analysis in City Planning, Journal of the American Institute of Planners [JAIP], 26(4), 273-279.

Lichfield, N., 1964, Cost-Benefit Analysis in Plan Evaluation, Town Planning Review [TPR], 35(2), 159-169.

Lichfield, N., 1971, Cost-Benefit Analysis in Planning: A Critique of the Roskill Commission, Regional Studies, 5(3), 157-183.

Lichfield, N., 1994, Community Impact Evaluation, Planning Theory, 6(12), 55-79.

Lichfield, N., 1996, Community Impact Evaluation, London: University College Press [UCL Press].

Lindblom, C. E., 1959, the science of muddling through, Public Administration Review, 19, 79–88.

Loube, R., 2016, Broadband Policy: Industry Planning and the Public Interest, Journal of Economic Issues, 50(2), 510-518.

Maidment, C. S., 2015, Planning in the Public Interest? Looking for the ‘public interest’ in English plan-making, PhD Thesis, University of Sheffield.

Mattila, H., 2016, Can collaborative planning go beyond locally focused notions of the “public interest”? The potential of Habermas’ concept of “generalizable interest” in pluralist and trans-scalar planning discourses, Planning Theory, 1–22 [DOI: 10.1177/1473095216640568].

Mc Kay, S., Murray, M., MacIntyre, S. and Kashyap, A., 2015, Evidence-based policymaking and the public interest: lessons in legitimacy, Town Planning Review [TPR], 86(2), 133-154.

Merriam-Webster., 2017, (Retrieved), English Merriam-Webster Dictionary (www.merriam-webster.com).

Meyerson, M. and Banfield, E.C., 1955, Politics, Planning, and the Public Interest: The Case of Public Housing in Chicago, New York: Free Press.

Minton, A., 2017, Common Good(s): Redefining the public interest and the common good, How to work together think tank.

Moore, T., 1978, Why Allow Planners to Do What They Do? A Justification from Economic Theory, Journal of the American Institute of Planners [JAIP], 44(4), 387-398.

Moroni, S., 2004, toward a reconstruction of Public Interest Criterion, Planning Theory, 3(2), 151–171.

Moroni, S., 2006, The Ethics behind Evaluation: Lichfield’s Approach and Utilitarianism, In: E. R. Alexander (ed.), Evaluation in Planning: Evolution and Prospects (21-39), Ashgate.

Moroni, S., 2018, Constitutional and post-constitutional problems: Reconsidering the issues of public interest, agonistic pluralism and private property in planning, Planning Theory, 1-19 [DOI: 10.1177/1473095218760092].

Mukerji, G. K., 1964, Allocative Efficiency of Controls in Indian Planning, the Economic Weekly, Annual Number February, 261-264.

Nagy, J. A., 2015, Planning and the public interest: A critical review, Romanian Review of Regional Studies, 11(2), 115-121.

Oxford, 2017, (Retrieved), English Oxford Dictionary Online (en.oxforddictionaries.com).

Özalp, S. and Erkut, G., 2016, Public Interest Perspective to Urban Interventions in İstanbul, Planlama, 26(3), 234–250.

Parker, G. and Doak, J., 2012, Key Concepts in Planning, Sage Publications.

Pennington, M., 2002, A Hayekian Liberal Critique of Collaborative Planning, In: Philip Allmendinger and Mark Tewdwr-Jones (eds.), Planning Futures New Directions for Planning Theory (pp. 187-2o4), London and New York: Routledge.

Persons, G. A., 1990, Defining the Public Interest: Citizen Participation in Metropolitan and State Policy Making, National Civic Review, 79(2) [March/April], 118-131.

Pitkin, H. F., 1981, Justice: On Relating Private and Public, Political Theory, 9(3), 327-352.

Puustinen, S., Mäntysalo, R. and Jarenko, K., 2017, the Varying Interpretations of Public Interest: Making Sense of Finnish Urban Planners’ Conceptions, Current Urban Studies, 5, 82-96.

Setchfield, B. and Abbott, J., 2015, planning and developing the North Lakes master planned community: governance and the public interest in the network society, Australian Planner, 52(2), 127–138.

Silbaugh, K. B., 2008, Women's Place: Urban Planning, Housing Design, and Work-Family Balance, Fordham Law Review, 76[Boston Univ. School of Law Working Paper No. 07-12, Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=995184]

Tait, M., 2016, Planning and the public interest: Still a relevant concept for planners? , Planning Theory, 15(4), 335–343.

Wright, I., 2013, Are we all neoliberals now? Urban Planning in a neoliberal era, 49th ISOCARP Congress.

Zeigler, H. and Huelshoff, M., 1980, Interest Groups and Public Policy, Policy Studies Journal, 9(3), 439-448.