Volume 23, Issue 3 (2019)
MJSP 2019, 23(3): 1-41 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mirgholami M, Pourjafar M, Misaghi S M. The Comparative Evaluation of the Spatial Planning System of Iran in Comparison With Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Malaysia. MJSP 2019; 23 (3) :1-41
URL: http://hsmsp.modares.ac.ir/article-21-23800-en.html
URL: http://hsmsp.modares.ac.ir/article-21-23800-en.html
1- Tabriz Islamic Art University , mirgholami@gmail.com
2- Professor at Tarbiat Modarres University
3- Tabriz Islamic Art University. Ph.D student
2- Professor at Tarbiat Modarres University
3- Tabriz Islamic Art University. Ph.D student
Abstract: (7712 Views)
Abstract:
Introduction: "Understanding and evaluating of spatial planning system" without recognizing of "planning and development system" of countries and without the Understanding of similar situations and lessons learned from others' experiences are not achieved to goals. In This paper isn’t "deliberately" used the experiences of advanced and developed industrial countries, and focus on "developing countries. " Because based on realistic approaches to development, the experiences of similar countries provide more appropriate territorial development strategies to the decision takers. Therefore, four countries (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Malaysia) have been selected for this assessment and analogy because based on social, economic, political and . . . characteristics, there is a greater relative and homogeneous relationship between the Islamic Republic of Iran and these countries, which is the main reason for this choice and comparison
Methodology: . In this analogy, two types of cognition include: basic knowledge (general and geographical status, economic and internal divisions), and special recognition (macro planning system and spatial planning system) were obtained from four countries and analogy with Iran. The method of research was descriptive-analytic and based on documentary and library studies that was completed by comparative analogy. First, the experienced international components were identified in the comparative evaluation knowledge and then based on the conditions of Iran and four Muslim countries The other seven and four components in the "content" and "procedural" dimensions for the concepts of "planning" and "spatial planning" were formulated and a comparative analogy was made for the situation in the five countries.
Results and discussion: according to the findings in the theoretical field (documentary-content), the macro-planning system of most of the studied countries is similar and in line with the more advanced industrial countries with some weaknesses, but in the field of action (process-outcome) the existing differences are very tangible. The situation in the urban planning of these countries has been weaker than their large-scale planning. In spatial planning at urban and metropolitan levels for planning and optimized spatial management, most often pursue the goal of sustainable development in varying degrees, and it is a way of responding to their challenges, but because of government features, lack of practical motivation and the lack of evaluation, monitoring and lack of cultural contexts in achieving the goals, they have a lot of obvious weaknesses.
Conclusion: The final findings showed that in the "macro planning system", all countries have a continuous planning horizon with distinct periods, a dominant economic approach, low participation, and a strong, but not executive, discursive chastiality. Iran, in terms of a theoretical approach similar to Saudi Arabia, Similar participation of Egypt and Saudi Arabia in the actors of development similar to Egypt and almost Turkey, and in other components, is the same as that of any other country. In the "Spatial Planning System", Iran has been involved in the components of the hierarchical levels of planning
Introduction: "Understanding and evaluating of spatial planning system" without recognizing of "planning and development system" of countries and without the Understanding of similar situations and lessons learned from others' experiences are not achieved to goals. In This paper isn’t "deliberately" used the experiences of advanced and developed industrial countries, and focus on "developing countries. " Because based on realistic approaches to development, the experiences of similar countries provide more appropriate territorial development strategies to the decision takers. Therefore, four countries (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Malaysia) have been selected for this assessment and analogy because based on social, economic, political and . . . characteristics, there is a greater relative and homogeneous relationship between the Islamic Republic of Iran and these countries, which is the main reason for this choice and comparison
Methodology: . In this analogy, two types of cognition include: basic knowledge (general and geographical status, economic and internal divisions), and special recognition (macro planning system and spatial planning system) were obtained from four countries and analogy with Iran. The method of research was descriptive-analytic and based on documentary and library studies that was completed by comparative analogy. First, the experienced international components were identified in the comparative evaluation knowledge and then based on the conditions of Iran and four Muslim countries The other seven and four components in the "content" and "procedural" dimensions for the concepts of "planning" and "spatial planning" were formulated and a comparative analogy was made for the situation in the five countries.
Results and discussion: according to the findings in the theoretical field (documentary-content), the macro-planning system of most of the studied countries is similar and in line with the more advanced industrial countries with some weaknesses, but in the field of action (process-outcome) the existing differences are very tangible. The situation in the urban planning of these countries has been weaker than their large-scale planning. In spatial planning at urban and metropolitan levels for planning and optimized spatial management, most often pursue the goal of sustainable development in varying degrees, and it is a way of responding to their challenges, but because of government features, lack of practical motivation and the lack of evaluation, monitoring and lack of cultural contexts in achieving the goals, they have a lot of obvious weaknesses.
Conclusion: The final findings showed that in the "macro planning system", all countries have a continuous planning horizon with distinct periods, a dominant economic approach, low participation, and a strong, but not executive, discursive chastiality. Iran, in terms of a theoretical approach similar to Saudi Arabia, Similar participation of Egypt and Saudi Arabia in the actors of development similar to Egypt and almost Turkey, and in other components, is the same as that of any other country. In the "Spatial Planning System", Iran has been involved in the components of the hierarchical levels of planning
Article Type: Qualitative Research |
Subject:
planning models,techniques and methods
Received: 2018/08/5 | Accepted: 2019/07/21 | Published: 2019/10/2
Received: 2018/08/5 | Accepted: 2019/07/21 | Published: 2019/10/2
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |