Sarah Faraj; Marjan Sharafi
Abstract
As the most well-known local authorities, mayors hold several roles that vary depending on different countries’ urban planning and management systems. The role and power of the mayor can be examined from two aspects of power on paper and power in practice. Thus, recognizing the mayor’s ...
Read More
As the most well-known local authorities, mayors hold several roles that vary depending on different countries’ urban planning and management systems. The role and power of the mayor can be examined from two aspects of power on paper and power in practice. Thus, recognizing the mayor’s role and power requires recognizing the official and legal function and authority and how this role and power is perceived in practice. This research examines the role and power of Tehran’s mayor from two aspects: power on paper and power in practice. This study uses a quantitative-qualitative method to explain the concept of power on paper by examining the relevant laws and legislation. To analyze the mayor’s power in practice, the citizens’ perceptions were studied through surveys, and the city administrators’ perceptions were analyzed through semi-structured interviews. This research uses the inductive content analysis method for data analysis. The findings indicate that the mayor of Tehran holds political, executive, ceremonial and facilitating roles, and the legal power of such functions has been gradually weakened and curtailed (on paper). Furthermore, the mayor’s power in practice does not correspond to that outlined on paper and mayors with personal brand and political support act beyond the bounds of the law.
Keywords: Power of the Mayor, Role of the Mayor, Power on Paper, Power in Practice, the Mayor of Tehran.
Introduction
In recent years, significant emphasis has been placed on the importance and role of mayors in urban development. This importance is to the extent that in many countries, mayors are not only in charge of the political and administrative leadership of urban governments but also can affect the policies and actions of governments directly and indirectly through their viewpoints, decisions, and actions. As the most well-known local authorities, mayors hold several roles that vary depending on different countries’ urban planning and management systems. From resolving urban issues to becoming policymakers and responsible authorities who play a critical role in enhancing the quality of life for citizens and improving service delivery, their functions have changed significantly over time. There are two general aspects from which to view the role and power of the mayor. The first is the mayor’s power on paper, which may be ascertained by examining the laws and legislation pertaining to the election of the mayor and the broad range of their responsibilities. The second aspect is the power in practice, which determines the outcomes and the extent of their influence in execution and action. Thus, recognizing the mayor’s role and power in the country's urban management system requires recognizing the official and legal function and authority and how this role and power is perceived in practice. This research examines the role and power of Tehran’s mayor from two aspects: power on paper and power in practice.
Methodology
This study uses a quantitative-qualitative method to examine and recognize the power of Tehran’s Mayor on paper and in practice. To further clarify the idea of authority on paper, relevant laws, rules, and legislation have been analyzed. To investigate the authority of the mayor in practice, the citizens’ perceptions were studied through surveys, and the city administrators’ perceptions were analyzed through interviews. The selection of participants for the qualitative part of this study was intentional and in line with the development of concepts. This study collected and surveyed 15 semi-structured interviews with city managers and 200 questionnaires from the citizens of Tehran. The qualitative content analysis method and descriptive statistics were also used to analyze the research data.
Results & Discussion
The study shows that the mayor of Tehran holds political, executive, ceremonial and facilitating roles. However, the legal power of such functions has been gradually weakened and curtailed (on paper). There is a clear difference between the citizens and the executives’ perceptions of the role and power of Tehran’s mayor, and that is the greater emphasis of the citizens on the executive management role. This emphasis is commonly echoed with different keywords in response to the questions, bearing concepts such as resolving city problems, providing equal urban services, urban development, participation, and fulfilling the citizens’ demands. Suppose we examine the issue from a different angle. In that case, we will discover that although the mayor’s political role is not considered particularly crucial by the citizens (contrary to the executive managers), they regard it as one of the most defining roles of Tehran’s mayors in the past, following the executive management and corruption function (transgressing the law, as well as self and collective profit-seeking). The mayor’s power on paper covers specialization and managerial ability to hold the office, interplay with power levels to fulfill the executive function, authority to elect, appoint, and discharge managers and deputies, and accountability to the council and the people. This power in practice covers choosing and appointing directors and deputies, providing finances, establishing affiliated corporations and organizations, fulfilling citizens’ demands, asking people to participate in decision-making, and countering corruption and violation. Formal interactions with power levels (interaction with the city council, for example), self-expression, individual skills, and managerial capacity fall within the legal authority of the mayor in action as well. Alternatively, contextualizing political, governmental, and ideological conceptions, massive and macro-level political support, informal interaction and communication (trading off, lobbying, etc.), and massive structural and constructive actions, are all examples of informal authority of Tehran’s mayor in action. The aforementioned are instances of Tehran’s mayor functioning beyond formal authority. On the other hand, the interactions of Tehran’s mayor with institutions of political authority, inclusion in the hierarchy of power, and possession of political influence can be mentioned as examples of the political authority of Tehran’s mayor.
Conclusions
The study shows that how municipal administrators perceive the authority and function of the mayor differs from how citizens do. The mayor’s power in practice does not correspond to that outlined on paper, and mayors with personal brand and political support act beyond the bounds of the law.
