تعامل دولت و بازار: خوانشی از برنامه‌ریزی فضایی شهری ایران

Introduction: State and market institutions are among the most important and influential political-economic organizations, whose composition and role can significantly influence the integrity of the social system. Urban spatial planning implies a specialized form of collective action regarding the social organization of space. At the heart of this collective action is a broad set of state-market relations. The fundamental question is how the roles and relations of market institutions (in their general sense and not in the sense of the physical market of cities) and state institutions are formed in urban spatial development planning. In Iran's urban spatial planning system, the emergence of fundamental challenges for cities, especially metropolises, has led each faction—whether proponents of the market or the state—to view the other as the primary cause of these problems. Advocates of the market economy identify state interference in urban spatial planning as the main obstacle to urban development. Conversely, supporters of state intervention consider the delegation of responsibilities to the private sector and market as the primary reason for the issues facing Iranian cities. Corruption in government, inefficient budgeting in local and national institutions, unrealistic urban development plans, and a lack of expertise among managers and urban planners are among the concerns raised by market advocates regarding urban development. Meanwhile, issues such as neglecting urban spatial justice, failing to provide urban public goods through the market, ignoring the externalities of investment on citizens, and prioritizing capitalist profit in urban space production have been highlighted by state-oriented groups
Methodology: This research is proposed at the theoretical and fundamental level of the planning discipline. Its main purpose is to understand and discover the role and function of the state and the market in the spatial planning of urban development in Iran. Therefore, the subject of this research is directly and indirectly related to the economic, social, and political context. Because the structure, function, and role of the state and the market in spatial planning have ambiguous, hidden, and complex dimensions, an in-depth, exploratory, and interpretive investigation is required. This cannot be understood through quantitative descriptive and analytical methods that are limited to specific variables and existing hypotheses and theories. On the other hand, Iran's political economy has its unique structure and background. In this particular economic environment, both market institutions and government play special roles and have unique relationships that need to be explored in depth
Therefore, a research method appropriate for theorizing should be employed to develop a theory suitable for the geographical context, with a deep understanding of the layers of urban political economy. Accordingly, this research employs systematic grounded theory as one of the qualitative methods based on the considerations of the interpretive paradigm. In-depth and semi-structured interviews based on theoretical sampling have been utilized to collect data to better understand the factors that shape government-market relations in the spatial planning of urban development in Iran.
Results: Open coding was conducted by analyzing the data line by line, and in some cases, by examining complete sentences or paragraphs until the underlying ideas were identified. In the next step, axial coding was performed to categorize concepts at a more abstract level and achieve categories. The categories were compared with one another until the researchers reached more general categories. By reviewing the interviews several times and removing duplicates, a total of 654 concepts, 59 sub-categories, and 20 main categories were identified.
Discussion: Selective coding is the final stage of analysis and categorization in the systematic method, during which the integration and refinement of the theoretical framework occur based on the paradigm model. The first step in integrating the theoretical framework, following the method of systematic grounded theory, is to determine the "central phenomenon." Through the analysis of the data used in this research, along with multi-level categorization and multiple revisions, it was revealed that the role and relationships between the state and the market in the spatial planning of urban development in Iran are based on the "institutional entanglement and suboptimal, inefficient combination" of these two key institutions. In other words, the causal, contextual, and intervening conditions affecting the relationship and roles of the state and the market in the spatial planning of Iranian cities have created a situation that has led to imperfections and inefficiencies in their roles and relationships. In response to this phenomenon, strategies have been adopted by agents that have exacerbated its consequences. The identified causal conditions include the categories: "maximum state intervention and inability to perform inherent duties," "oil rentier state," "underdeveloped, dependent, and quasi-modern private sector," "non-competitive market and the existence of quasi-governmental and quasi-market institutions dependent on political power," "the replacement of the new order in the relationship and role of the state and the market after the revolution," and "unclear borders of the state and the market in the supply of public and private urban goods." These are the main causes of the formation of the central category in this research. The categories of "unproductive economy and speculation in urban real estate," "institutional weakness in urban spatial planning," "state left over from rapid exogenous urban growth," and "the lack of formation of local government in Iran" represent the contextual conditions that underlie the inefficiency of the roles and relationships between the state and the market in the spatial planning of urban development in Iran. On the other hand, intervening conditions such as "imitative and unrealistic spatial planning," "complexity of public interest and conflict of interests in urban spatial planning," and "multiplicity of discourse among intellectuals and politicians" have contributed to intensifying the non-transparent and ineffective relations between the state and the market.
Conclusion: The analysis conducted in this research indicates that examining the relationship and role of the government and the market within the complex political economy of Iran faces many challenges. This complexity and difficulty in planning urban spatial development in Iran is significant because, from an institutional perspective, the existence of countless nested institutions makes it nearly impossible to provide a comprehensive framework. In other words, any research in this field can only clarify part of the story to some extent. This current research, acknowledging this uneven path, aimed to take a small step in developing theoretical knowledge in this area. It emphasizes the importance of the government-market dynamic in urban spatial planning by introducing relevant concepts from other scientific disciplines. Ultimately, it should be acknowledged that the plan and theory presented in this article is nothing more than a simple outline, supported by the evidence and reasoning discussed. Furthermore, this theory, like any theory in any science, does not encapsulate all facts; rather, it serves as an abstract framework to organize and analyze various complex phenomena and their interrelationships. Consequently, it leaves some issues unanswered and does not clarify certain ambiguities. All these deficiencies can be addressed in future research.