Defining the Conceptual Framework of Community-Led Urban Regeneration Based on Training in the Historic Zones

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Urbanism Department, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University

2 PhD Student, Urbanism Department, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract

During the evolution of the urban regeneration approach, paying attention to social participation has led to the formation of community-led urban regeneration. Social participation can improve social capital, sense of place and responsibility to place through community-led urban regeneration process. Since sufficient knowledge and skills are needed for individuals to participate in the process of local development, it seems that their lack of social participation in the aforementioned process is due to the lack of required education. With the aim of explaining the relationship between education and urban regeneration as well as determining the role of education in the process of community-led urban regeneration, this study utilized qualitative analysis and content analysis method to review the theories, statements, and international declarations and charters to compose the community-led urban regeneration through education. In order to determine the aforementioned relationship, the main objective addressed the effect of social education on the process of community-led urban regeneration. Based on a review of the existing theories and experiences, three approaches were identified: the establishment of higher education institutes in the target neighborhoods, public and fair access to educational facilities, and social education of the residents in the target neighborhoods. The results of the study showed that employing a participatory approach as a planning paradigm would lead to the success of urban regeneration projects. The important point is that social training and social education are not only means to achieve urban regeneration objectives but those should be considered as executive tools to increase the residents' participation. In addition, based on this concept, training is conceived as an enabling, empowering, capacity-building, and institutionalizing means for the residents that raises their awareness and leads to social participation. In fact, it can sensitize the residents to their environment and increase their responsibility toward upcoming development of their neighborhood.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

ایزدی، محمدسعید، فیضی، رضا. (1389). بازآفرینی شهری کنش و بینشی جامع و یکپارچه در ساماندهی محدوده­های هدف برنامه­های بهسازی و نوسازی شهری. هفت شهر، 33-34 ، 74-80.
بحرینی، سید­حسین، ایزدی، محمد­سعید، مفیدی، مهرانوش. (1392). رویکردها و سیاست­های نوسازی شهری (از بازسازی تا بازآفرینی­شهری پایدار). فصلنامه مطالعات شهری، 3 (9)، 17-29.
پوراحمد، احمد، حبیبی، کیومرث، کشاورز، مهناز. (1389). سیر تحول بازآفرینی شهری به عنوان رویکردی نو در بافت های فرسوده شهری. مطالعاتشهرایرانیاسلامی، 1 (1) ، 73-92.
حبیبی، محسن، سعیدی رضوانی، هادی. (1384). شهرسازی مشارکتی؛ کاوشی نظری در شرایط ایران. نشریۀ هنرهای زیبا، 24، 15-24.
حناچی، پیروز. (1391). مرمت شهری در بافتهای تاریخی ایران. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
حناچی، پیروز، فدایی نژاد، سمیه. (1390). تدوین چارچوب مفهومی حفاظت و بازآفرینی یکپارچه در بافت های فرهنگی-تاریخی. نشریۀ هنرهای زیبا، 46 ،  15-26.
رابرتز، پیتر، سایک، هیو. (2000). بازآفرینی شهری. ترجمۀ محمدسعید ایزدی و پیروز حناچی (1393). تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
راجرز، لرد. (1999). به سوی یک رنسانس شهری. ترجمه محمد سعید ایزدی (1393). تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
لطفی، سهند. (1390). بازآفرینی شهری فرهنگ مبنا: تأملی بر بنُ­مایه­های فرهنگی و کُنش بازآفرینی. نشریه هنرهای زیبا، 45،  47-60.
منگن، استیون، پی. (1950). طرد اجتماعی و پهنه­های مسأله­دار اروپا؛ مدیریت نوسازی شهری. ترجمۀ عارف اقوامی مقدم (1390). تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
Assefa, G., & Frostell, B. (2007). Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies. Technology in society, 29(1), 63-78.
Bevilacqua, C; Calabro, J. Maione, C. (2013). The Rule of Community in Urban Regeneration: Mixed Use Area Approach in USA Proceeding REAL CORP 2013. Rome: Tagungsb. 20-23.
Bianchini, F., & Ghilardi, L. (2007). Thinking culturally about place. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 3(4), 280-286.
Calthorpe, P.  Fulton, W. (2001). The Regional City. Island: Island Press.
Colantonio. A. Dixon. Tim. (2011). Urban Regeneration & Social Sustainability: Best Practice from European Cities. Wiley-Blackwell.
Hall, P. (2005). The world’s urban systems: a European perspective. Global Urban Development, 1(1), 1-12.
Hightower, H. C. (1969). Planning theory in contemporary professional education. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(5), 326-329.
Izadi, M. s. (2006). A Study on City Center Regeneration: A Comparative analysis of Two Different Approaches to the Revitalization of Historic City Centers in Iran. Newcastle University.
LUDA. (2003). Appraisal of Urban Rehabilitation Literature and Projects, including a Glossary of Terms and a Preliminary Set of Indicators Characterizing LUDA. Dresden:  Large Scale Urban Distressed Areas (LUDA).
McDonald, S., Malys, N., & Maliene, V. (2009). Urban regeneration for sustainable communities: A case study. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 15(1), 49-59.
Roberts P. & Sykes H. (2000). Urban Regeneration: A handbook. London:  SAGE Publications.
Turok, I. (2005). Urban regeneration: What can be done and what should be avoided. In Istanbul 2004 International Urban Regeneration Symposium: Workshop of Kucukcekmece District (pp. 57-62).
W.Caves, R. (2005). Encyclopedia of the city. New York: Routledge.
Urban Planning Knowledge
Volume 2, Issue 3 - Serial Number 4
December 2019
Pages 21-34

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 07 September 2018
  • Revise Date: 30 November 2018
  • Accept Date: 16 December 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics