نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی،دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2 استادگروه شهرسازی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
3 استاد گروه برنامه ریزی و طراحی شهری، دانشگاه فنی برلین، برلین، آلمان
چکیده
تبیین نتایج «برنامههای آمایشی» به‌عنوان محصول برنامهریزی فضایی با «پایداری سکونتگاه‌ها» به‌عنوان محصول پایداری و توسعه پایدار با رویکردهای جدید یک مسئله جدی است. در این پژوهش، محور اقتصاد با رویکرد RBM موردنظر است. هدف، قابلیت دستیابی به پایداری سکونتگاه‌ها با تأکید بر رشد اقتصادی و اشتغال پایدار از طریق برنامههای آمایش استانی در مناطق کمتر توسعه‌یافته است. طرح این پژوهش، ترکیبی متوالی است؛ و روش کمی- کیفی در دو فاز انجام خواهد شد؛ در فاز اول با مرور نظام‌مند پژوهش‌های پیشین و تحلیل محتوای کیفی جهت‌دار اسناد برنامههای آمایش استان‌های مناطق کمتر توسعه‌یافته منتخب پژوهش، ارکان و عوامل پایداری سکونتگاه‌ها استخراج شد. در فاز بعدی اعتبار ارکان و عوامل و نیز رابطه متقابل آن‌ها و بازتاب محتوایی و عملی آن‌ها در اسناد برنامههای آمایش استان ه از طریق مصاحبه نیمه‌ساختاریافته با خبرگان و تحلیل محتوای تلخیصی این مصاحبه واکاوی شد. برآیند نتایج تحلیل، تناظری موجه میان سطوح فضایی و مؤلفه‌های مذکور پایداری سکونتگاه‌ها، با ماهیت سطوح سه‌گانه خروجی، پیامد و اثر را نشان می‌دهد. با بزرگترشدن سطح فضایی سکونتگاه‌ها ضریب نفوذ نتایج برنامههای توسعه در طول زمان کاهش می‌یابد و از «اثر» به «خروجی» میل می‌کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
Analyzing the Feasibility of the of Settlements Sustainability in the Provincial Spatial Plans of Less Developed Regions through the RBM Approach
نویسندگان [English]
- samane niazkhani 1
- Esfandiar Zebardast 2
- Angela Million 3
1 PhD csndidate of Urban planning, University of Tehran, Tehran,Iran
2 Professor of Urban planning, University of Tehran.Tehran.Iran
3 Professor of urban and design planning, University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
چکیده [English]
The relationship between "spatial plans" as products of spatial planning and "settlement sustainability" as an outcome of sustainable development presents a significant challenge. This issue is critical in theoretical and scientific domains and requires exploration through innovative approaches. Given the simplicity of the sustainability concept, this research emphasizes an economic perspective, employing the Results-Based Management (RBM) approach. The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of settlement sustainability by focusing on economic growth and sustainable employment through provincial spatial plans in less developed regions. The research design follows a sequential approach and employs a mixed quantitative-qualitative methodology conducted in two phases. In the first phase, a document review of previous studies identified the pillars and factors of settlement sustainability. In the second phase, the validity of these pillars and factors, as well as their interrelationships were analyzed. This analysis also examined their content and practical reflection within the provincial spatial plans of selected less developed regions. Semi-structured interviews with experts were conducted, and a summative content analysis approach was applied.The findings reveal a clear correspondence between spatial levels and settlement sustainability factors, aligning with the three levels of results: output, outcome, and effect. As the spatial scale of settlements increases, the influence of development plan results diminishes over time, transitioning from "effect" to "output."
Keywords: Spatial planning, Provincial Spatial Plan, Settlements Sustainability, RBM, Less Developed Regions.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Given the shared theoretical foundations of spatial planning and the principles of sustainable development (Mastop, 1997; Albrechts, 2017), it is essential to analyze spatial plans as outputs of spatial planning in relation to settlement sustainability as an outcome of sustainable development. Considering the simplicity of the sustainability concept and the focus of spatial plans in Iran, where economic aspects are more prominent, this research prioritizes economic growth and sustainable employment. In this context, most models proposed for sustainable development aim to maximize community benefits by prioritizing less developed regions (Sherafati et al., 2019). Furthermore, contemporary planning approaches that integrate evaluation and monitoring have gained increasing attention. Consequently, this research adopts a novel Results-Based Management (RBM) approach to assess the feasibility of sustainable settlements in less developed regions.
Literature Review
The greatest challenge facing planning sciences is transforming planning theory and practice to positively contribute to sustainable development (Edwards, 2005). In evaluating spatial plans in Iran, few studies establish a substantive connection to the principles of sustainable development. Most research in this area focuses on procedural aspects, particularly the failure to implement these plans effectively from a general perspective (Sharifzadegan et al., 2000). Regarding the feasibility of settlement sustainability, much of the research has concentrated on single dimensions, such as climate, technology, or housing (Tourk, 2011; Smeddle, 2016). In the domain of spatial planning and settlement sustainability, existing studies often emphasize specific elements of spatial planning, such as transportation or land use (Shekar et al., 2019), or limit their focus to specific spatial levels, such as villages (Ghanbari, 2020). Additionally, these studies rarely address the feasibility of settlement sustainability in response to overarching policy frameworks like spatial plans. Consequently, insufficient attention has been given to the feasibility of settlement sustainability with a focus on economic growth and sustainable employment in less developed regions of Iran through provincial spatial planning. This highlights a significant gap in analyzing and explaining the outcomes of spatial planning in relation to sustainability, particularly in the context of settlement sustainability emphasizing economic growth and sustainable employment.
Methodology
This research adopts a combined inductive-deductive approach. The methodology integrates quantitative and qualitative techniques across two phases. In the first phase, a "documentary review" was conducted to identify the elements and factors underlying the main concepts, including "settlement sustainability" and "provincial spatial plans." In the second phase, planning documents from four provinces within the target area—less developed regions—were selected for detailed analysis. To assess the validity of the identified elements and factors, as well as their content and practical reflection in provincial spatial plans, in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with experts and elites. Participants were selected using "purposive stratified sampling" to achieve theoretical saturation and data adequacy (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009). The interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, facilitated by ATLAS.ti software. The analysis resulted in networks of connections between codes, providing the researcher with a comprehensive understanding of the pillars and factors of settlement sustainability and their representation within the reviewed documents.
Results
The first result of the analysis was the formation of a network of codes that defined the dimensions of sustainability. Subsequently, nine components with a predominant economic focus in the sustainability of settlements were identified based on expert opinions. These nine components were extracted from a total of 18 components derived from theoretical and empirical sources, including theses, articles, books, and national and international reports on settlement sustainability. Following this, conceptual networks linking spatial levels and economic components were developed. These networks categorized the results of the plans into three levels: output, outcome, and impact, highlighting the varying influences of the economic components across spatial levels.
Conclusion
In addition to the widely recognized economic, social, and environmental dimensions found in theoretical literature, the macro-level sustainability framework also confirms the existence of conceptual relationships with two additional dimensions: institutional-political and spatial-physical. The spatial levels and nine economic components of settlement sustainability demonstrate a reasonable alignment with the three-tier framework of results: output, outcome, and impact. As the spatial level of settlements increases, the penetration coefficient of development plan outcomes diminishes over time, transitioning from "impact" to "output."
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Spatial planning
- Provincial Spatial Plan
- Settlements Sustainability
- RBM
- Less Developed Regions
Akbari, Y., Imani Jajarmi, H., & Rostamali-Zadeh, V.-A. (2016). Analysis and investigation of obstacles to land planning in Iran. Science and Technology Policy Quarterly, 6(3), 5-13. [In Persian]
Albrechts, L. (2017). From traditional land use planning to strategic spatial planning: The case of Flanders. In Revival: The Changing Institutional Landscape of Planning (pp. 95–120). Routledge. (Original work published 2001)
Allain, S., Plumecocq, G., & Leenhardt, D. (2018). Spatial aggregation of indicators in sustainability assessments: Descriptive and normative claims. Land Use Policy, 76, 577-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.038
Amou, E., & Hatami Nejad, H. (2019). Pathology and evaluation of land planning plans in Iran. Journal of Regional Planning, 9(34), 27-38. [In Persian]
Bahreini, H., & Hajibandeh, M. (2011). Urban village model: An effective approach to achieving sustainability of rural settlements. Housing and Rural Environment, Summer 2011(134), 49-74. [In Persian]
Badri, A., Yari Hesar, A., Pourtaheri, M., & Faraji Sabkabar, H. (2013). Study and explanation of the process of selecting indicators for measuring and evaluating the sustainability of settlements in the metropolitan area with an emphasis on Tehran metropolis. Geography and Development(32), 127-148. https://doi.org/10.22111/GDIJ.2013.1168. [In Persian]
Campbell, S. D. (2016). The planner’s triangle revisited: Sustainability and the evolution of a planning ideal that can’t stand still. Journal of the American Planning Association, 82(4), 388-397. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2016.1214080
Chen, W., Cheshmehzangi, A., Mangi, E., Heath, T., & Yu, J. (2023). Limitations of institutional dimension in existing sustainability assessment tools: From the perspective of territory. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 5, 100217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2023.100217
Coplák, J., & Rakšányi, P. (2003). Planning sustainable settlements. Slovak University of Technology Bratislava.
Dewar, D. (2011). The relationship between spatial planning and transportation planning in Southern Africa and its consequences for human settlement. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering, 5, 241-246.
Edwards, A. R. (2005). The sustainability revolution: Portrait of a paradigm shift. New Society Publishers.
Ghanbari, A., Rahmani Fazli, A., & Azizpour, F. (2020). Spatial analysis of rural settlements development using sustainable development approach (Case study: Villages of Khorramabad County). Journal of Research & Rural Planning, 9(1), 53-71.
Gharagozloo, H., Rahmani Fazli, A., Azizpour, F., & Jalalian, H. (2019). Spatial analysis of sustainability of rural settlements: Case study: Qom Province. Human Geography Research, 52(3), 953-969. https://doi.org/10.22059/jhgr.2019.260566.1007728. [In Persian]
Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T.-S. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. The Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 874–907. https://doi.org/10.2307/258959
IKEA Foundation. (2015). Sustainable settlements: Maximizing the social, environmental and economic gains in humanitarian displacement settings. NRC (Norwegian Refugee Council).
Hafner, J. (2023). Institutional dimension of sustainable development. Visoka poslovna škola strukovnih studija, Novi Sad. https://doi.org/article:ea5c9abf306f40f3852ca1191fc2703b.
Jepson, E. J., Jr. (2001). Sustainability and planning: Diverse concepts and close associations. Journal of Planning Literature, 15(4), 499-510. https://doi.org/10.1177/088541220101500401
Koresawa, A., & Konvitz, J. (2001). The scope of spatial planning. In Towards a New Role for Spatial Planning (pp. 11-23). OECD Publications Services.
Lu, W., & Huang, Z. (2021). Research on eight forces analysis model of urban development planning region. Economic Review, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.14017/j.cnki.2095-5766.2021.0011.
Majerová, V. (2007). Social factors influencing the differences between developed and less developed regions. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská ekonomika), 53, 513-517. https://doi.org/10.17221/975-AGRICECON
Mastop, H. (1997). Performance in Dutch spatial planning: An introduction. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 24(6), 807-813.
Melchiorri, M., Pesaresi, M., Florczyk, A. J., Corbane, C., & Kemper, T. (2019). Principles and applications of the global human settlement layer as baseline for the land use efficiency indicator—SDG 11.3.1. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 8(2), 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8020096
Mensah, J., Ricart, S., & Casadevall, S. (2019). Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent Social Sciences, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2019.1653531
Mills, G. (2006). Progress toward sustainable settlements: A role for urban climatology. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 84, 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-005-0145-0
Moreno Pires, S., Polido, A., Teles, F., Silva, P., & Rodrigues, C. (2020). Territorial innovation models in less developed regions in Europe: The quest for a new research agenda? European Planning Studies, 28(8), 1639-1666. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1697211
Niazkhani, S., Zebardast, E., & Million, A. (2022). RBM, a necessity for implementability evaluation of settlement sustainability in spatial plans of less developed regions. In 2nd International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Spatial Methods for Urban Sustainability (SMUS Conference) and the 1st RC33 Regional Conference “Latin America: Brazil in cooperation with ESA RN21 Quantitative Methods” (pp. 8-10).
Niazkhani, S., Zebardast, E., & Million, A. (2023). Teaching a new mixed method in spatial case selection through depoliticization of planning: Case study of less developed regions. In 35th AESOP Annual Congress Integrated planning in a world of turbulence (pp. 11-15). Łódź.
Niazkhani, S., Zebardast, E., & Million, A. (2024). Settlement sustainability in less developed regions: A priority for regional balanced development. In INCLUSIVE CITIES AND REGIONS TERRITOIRES INCLUSIFS 14° Biennale of European Towns and Town Planners (pp. 22-24). Naples.
- CEPAL. (2005). Sustainable human settlements development in Latin America and the Caribbean. UN Symbol.: LC/L.2287-P. ISBN: 9211215439. Editorial: ECLAC.
Parker, J. (1986). Interdisciplinary collaboration in urban design. International Journal of Project Management, 4(1), 18-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-7863(86)90057-8
Paddison, R. (2002). From unified local government to decentred local governance: The ‘institutional turn’ in Glasgow. GeoJournal, 58(1), 11-21.
Perry, B., & Atherton, M. (2017). Beyond critique: The value of co-production in realizing just cities? Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2017.1297389
Pieterse, E. (2008). City futures: Confronting the crisis of urban development. University of Cape Town Press.
Pinson, D. (2004). Urban planning: An ‘undisciplined’ discipline? Futures, 36(4), 503-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2003.10.008
Potter, W. J., & Levine-Donnerstein, D. (1999). Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27, 258-284.
Sarafi, M. (2014). Land planning: What and why. Special Issue of the Iranian Society of Consulting Engineers on Land Planning, 14-20. [In Persian]
Sharifzadegan, M. H., & Razavi Dehkordi, S. (2010). Evaluation of the “land planning” planning process in Iran and improvement strategies. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 7(4), 87-100. [In Persian]
Shekhar, H., Schmidt, A. J., & Wehling, H. W. (2019). Exploring wellbeing in human settlements - A spatial planning perspective. Habitat International, 87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.05.006
Sherafati, M., Bashiri, M., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., & Pishvaee, M. S. (2019). Supply chain network design considering sustainable development paradigm: A case study in cable industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 234, 366-380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.095
Smeddle-Thompson, L. (2012). Implementing sustainable human settlements (MPhil thesis). Stellenbosch University. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/20153
Soltani, N. (2013). Evaluation of obstacles facing land planning plans in Iran with an integrated approach. Journal of Planning and Spatial Planning, 17(3). [In Persian]
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage.
Taylor, S. J. (2016). A review of sustainable development principles: Centre for environmental studies. University of Pretoria.
Tofiqh, F. (2005). Land planning: Global experience and its adaptation to the Iranian situation. Publications of the Center for Urban Planning and Architecture Studies and Research, Tehran. [In Persian]
Turok, I. (2011). The three pillars of sustainable human settlements. HSREDITION01. Department of Human Settlements, in collaboration with Business Enterprises @ the University of Pretoria. ISBN: 978-0-620-58301-5.
UN Habitat. (2021). Results-based management: Overview of RBM. Retrieved January 15, 2021, from https://unhabitat.org/results-based-management/Overview of RBM/
Van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., & Verbruggen, H. (1999). Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: An evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint’. Ecological Economics, 29(1), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00032-4
Van Niekerk, A., Petzer, E., Ndaba, D., Pieterse, A., Rajab, A., & Kruger, T. (2015). Revising the South African guidelines for human settlement planning and design. 9 - 11 December 2015, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa. ISBN: 978-0-7988-5624-9.
Williams, C. C., & Millington, A. C. (2004). The diverse and contested meanings of sustainable development. The Geographical Journal, 170(2), 99-104.
WSSD (World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002). (2002). Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development. South Africa, 26 August to 4 September 2002.
Yang, M., Song, K., Shi, et al. (2016). The spatial differentiation of urban transition in China with the model of gradual institutional changes. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 36(10), 1466-1473.
استناد به این مقاله: نیازخانی، سمانه.، زبردست، اسفندیار.، میلیون، آنگلا. (1403). واکاوی تحقق پذیری پایداری سکونتگاه‌ها در برنامههای آمایش استانی مناطق کمتر توسعه‌یافته با رویکرد RBM. فصلنامه برنامهریزی شهری و منطقه‌ای، فصلنامه برنامهریزی توسعه شهری و منطقه‌ای، 9(31)، 1 -30. DOI: 10.22054/urdp.2024.80953.1647
Urban and Regional Development Planning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License...
)