Explaining the Model of Integrated Urban Land Governance for Effective Urban Land Policy and Management in Developing Countries (Case Study: Iran and Gorgan)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D Candidate, Department of Urbansim, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Urbanism, Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Urbansim, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background: The transformation of urban land management systems from instrumental approaches to participatory approaches has led to the development of a new approach to land governance.
Objectives: The present research addresses the question of what is an appropriate and efficient model of urban land policy and management. The main issue here is to resolve the fundamental conflicts and tensions that emerge in networks that the government has the task of regulating either directly (interdependence theory) and indirectly (the theory of sovereignty, the theory of sovereignty, the theory of sovereignty).
Methodology: This study employs a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods at three spatial levels. The population of the study included the institutions responsible for urban land use and their clients. Documentary and field methods (questionnaire) were used for data collection and multivariate linear regression model and path analysis were used for quantitative data analysis and then content analysis method was used for qualitative analysis.
Results: The results of the structural equations show that among the five independent variables of the study including coordination and consensus, effectiveness and accountability, accountability, decentralization, and strategic insight of agreeable integration variable with the coefficient of 0.492 the most direct (indirect and indirect) coefficients. It had a city. The analysis of Iran's urban land management structure also shows that this structure is highly fragmented in decision-making and lack of land management integration, which is the main cause of its inconsistency and inefficiency.
Conclusion: Therefore, an integrated urban governance model was proposed as a suitable and efficient model based on consensual (horizontal / vertical) integration between all actors and the transfer of part of government authority to the lowest local level along with capacity building. Consequently, it is imperative that the government reconsider the land management approach and structure. Finally, the effectiveness, explanation and generalization of this model were confirmed by experts.

Highlights

Participatory approaches in the form of land governance emphasize resolving the conflicts and fundamental tensions created in the networks by the government, which is responsible for regulating them. The integrated urban land governance model is proposed as a suitable and efficient model based on agreement-oriented (horizontal / vertical) integration among all actors and delegating part of the government's authority to the lowest local level along with capacity building.

Keywords

References

Agere, S. (2000). Promoting good governance: Principles, practices and perspectives (Vol. 11). Commonwealth Secretariat.
Ardashiri, M. (1999). The role of land management in urban development policies. Abadi, 33, 70-76. (in Persian
Arko-Adjei, A. (2011). Adapting land administration to the institutional framework of customary tenure: The case of peri-urban Ghana (No. 184). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: IOS Press.
Borras Jr, S. M., & Franco, J. C. (2010). Contemporary discourses and contestations around pro‐poor land policies and land governance. Journal of Agrarian Change, 10(1), 1-32.
Davey, K. J. (1993). Elements of urban management. The World Bank. 
Davies, J. S., & Spicer, A. (2015). Interrogating networks: Towards an agnostic perspective on governance research. Environment and Planning C: Government and policy, 33(2), 223-238.
De Vries, W. T. (2018). Towards a theory of met governance of land: fundamentals and prospects. Journal of land policy and governance (JLPG), 1(1), 26-36.
Dollar, D., & Pritchett, L. (1998). Assessing aid-what works, what doesn't, and why (No. 18295, p. 1). The World Bank.
Dowall, D. E., Clarke, G., & Clarke, G. (1996). A framework for reforming urban land policies in developing countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Ejlali, P., Rafieian, M., & Asgari, A. (2012). Advocacy Planning Theory, In Traditional and New Perspective Planning Theory. Tehran: Agah Publishing. (in Persian)
El Araby, M. M. (2003). The role of the state in managing urban land supply and prices in Egypt. Habitat International, 27(3), 429-458.
Enemark, S., & Williamson, I. (2004). Capacity building in land administration–A conceptual approach. Survey review, 37(294), 639-650.
Evans, B., Joas, M., Sundback, S., & Theobald, K. (2005). Governing sustainable cities. Earthscan.
Fani, Z. & Doiran, I. (2008). Research in the land and housing market (Case: Zanjan, 1999-2007). Housing and Rural Environment, 27 (124), 12-25. (in Persian)
FAO. (2007). Good Governance in Land Tenure and Administration, FAO Land Tenure Studies (9). Rome, Italy.www.fao.org.
Fukuda Parr, S, Lopes, C, and Malik, K. (2002). Capacity for Development: New Solution for Old Problems, United Nations Development Programmes. New York.
Gibbs, D. C., Jonas, A. E., Reimer, S., & Spooner, D. J. (2001). Governance, institutional capacity and partnerships in local economic development: theoretical issues and empirical evidence from the Humber Sub‐region. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(1), 103-119.
Griffiths, A., Haigh, N., & Rassias, J. (2007). A Framework for Understanding Institutional Governance Systems and Climate Change: The Case of Australia. European Management Journal, 25(6), 415-427.
Hazenberg, J. L. (2016). Good governance contested: exploring human rights and sustainability as normative goals. In Decentralization and Governance in Indonesia (pp. 31-50). Springer, Cham.
Hazlehurst, D. (2001). Networks and policy making: from theory to practice in Australian social policy.
He, B. (2011). Barry Hindess and the critique of democracy. Alternatives, 36(1), 17-24.
Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2001). Neo-Marshallian nodes, institutional thickness, and Britain's ‘Motor Sport Valley’: thick or thin?. Environment and Planning A, 33(7), 1169-1183.
Innes, J. E. (2004). Consensus building: Clarifications for the critics. Planning theory, 3(1), 5-20.
Ioan-Franc, V., Ristea, A. L., & Popescu, C. (2015). Integrated urban governance: A new paradigm of urban economy. Procedia Economics and Finance, 22, 699-705.
Jessop, B. (1997). Capitalism and its future: remarks on regulation, government and governance. Review of International Political Economy, 4(3), 561-581.
Kivell, P. (1993). Land and the city: patterns and processes of urban change. Psychology Press.
Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. (2000). Public management and policy networks: foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Management an International Journal of Research and Theory, 2(2), 135-158.
Lee, J. H. (2008). Regional governance and collaboration: A comparative study on economic development policy process in Minneapolis and Pittsburgh Regions (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh).
Maroufi, H. (2012). Book Review: The Just City. Cities, 29.
McGill, R. (2016). Institutional development: A third world city management perspective. Springer.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). OECD Sustainable Development Studies Institutionalising Sustainable Development. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Palmer, D., Fricska, S., & Wehrmann, B. (2009). Towards Improved Land Governance: land tenure working paper 11 (FAO of UN for human settlement programme).
Pena, J., Guasch, J. L., & Escribano, A. (2000). Reforming public institutions and strengthening governance: a World Bank strategy. The World Bank.
Pourmohammadi, M. & Khalilnejad, A. (2001). The role and importance of land in urban development plans and mechanisms for dealing with construction violations. Journal of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz, 10, 9-23. (in Persian)
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2007). Theoretical approaches to democratic network governance. In Theories of democratic network governance (pp. 233-246). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Stimson, R. J., Stough, R., & Salazar, M. (2009). Leadership and institutions in regional endogenous development. Edward Elgar Publishing.
UN-HABITAT. (2008).Secure Land Rights for All,GLTN contributes to the implementation of pro poor land policies to achieve secure land rights for all, The Global Land Tool Network.www.gltn.net.
UN-Habitat. (2012).Handling Land: Innovative tools for land governance and secure tenure, HS Number: HS/023/12E, United Nations Human Settlements, Programme (UN-Habitat). http://www.unhabitat.org.
Zakout, W., Wehrmann, B., & Torhonen, M. P. (2006). Good governance in land administration. World Bank: Washington, DC, USA.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 15 February 2020
  • Revise Date: 11 March 2020
  • Accept Date: 08 April 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics