Developing the appropriate good urban governance model for metropolises of Iran and the integrated analysis of current situation (Case study: Mashhad)

Document Type : .

Authors

1 Associate Prof., Faculty of management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'I University, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. Student in public administration, Faculty of management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'I University, Tehran, Iran

3 Prof., Faculty of management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'I University, Tehran, Iran.

4 Associate Prof., Faculty of management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'I University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

In advanced countries, urban management is based on the theory of good urban governance to solve urban management problems, especially in metropolises. Various global and regional models have been defined for good urban governance and each has different dimensions and components. In order to establish good urban governance in the metropolises of the country, it is necessary to develop an indigenous model of urban governance for each city separately. The purpose of the research is to firstly outline the proportional model of good urban governance for metropolitan areas in terms of appropriate components, dimensions, and criteria, and secondly, by integrating an outline analysis to obtain strategies for moving towards good urban governance. In this research, different patterns of urban governance at the international level have been studied and their dimensions and components have been summarized and presented in terms of their similarities and themes. Delphi panel experts' opinions were then used to localize the model and adjust it to the metropolitan conditions of the country. The study was conducted in Mashhad city and 42 selected experts from seven stakeholders and main stakeholders of Mashhad were selected as experts and Delphi Panel through Judicial and Snowball Sampling and participated in Delphi Panel and met the dimensions and criteria of good urban governance scored and added or removed some items. Then according to the final dimensions and criteria, the current status of Mashhad metropolitan area was evaluated and the strengths and weaknesses were determined. Finally, a good and appropriate model of good urban governance for the city of Mashhad was determined based on the components, dimensions and criteria with each weight, evaluation of the current status of Mashhad based on this model with a score on the components, dimensions and criteria was carried out and the traffic guidelines from the current situation towards the prospect of good urban governance. To validate the results and provide executive solutions, two focus group meetings were held with the selected experts representing the above spectrum and the results were confirmed in Focus Group.
Extended Abstract
Introduction:
Urban management in metropolitan areas of the country now faces many complex and multifaceted problems, but with a top-down and centralized urban management model based on the classical and new public management paradigms it is practically inadequate to address them. Also, in the digital revolutionary space of information technology and social networks, people's expectations of urban management have risen sharply due to insufficient attention to the opinions and capabilities and the willingness of public and private and public sectors to participate in decision making and implementation. In the urban management environment, as well as insufficient attention to vulnerable sections of society such as the suburbs, women, the disabled, etc., public dissatisfaction with the urban management complex has also increased. New urban management systems provide approaches to address these challenges and challenges in urban life. The approach that has become the dominant analytical model of urban management in recent decades has been the approach of good urban governance. Good urban governance represents an approach that city management is not solely in the hands of the state and the government, but rather in a collaborative process between the government, the private sector, and the public institutions of decision making and implementation for the city. In fact, the dominant global paradigm for solving these problems is the model of urban participatory management with the role of all the actors of urban management known as good urban governance. There is no such a comprehensive approach in the metropolises of the country and no native model has been developed for good urban governance, while international organizations and institutions working in the field of urban governance have emphasized the development of an indigenous model of good urban governance. It is up to each country and city to overcome the problems mentioned above with this model of good urban governance. Therefore, in the absence of an indigenous and appropriate country model for good urban governance, a model for good urban governance in metropolitan areas should be developed so that it can move towards establishing good urban governance. The purpose of the research is to firstly outline the proportional model of good urban governance for metropolitan areas in terms of appropriate components, dimensions, and criteria, and secondly, by integrating an outline analysis to obtain strategies for moving towards good urban governance.
Methodology:
In the present study, first, a review of the various tools of good urban governance in the world has been conducted and the criteria and components of each have been summarized and then a general framework of criteria and components of good urban governance has been obtained by integrating similar criteria and components. The study was conducted in Mashhad city and 42 selected experts from seven stakeholders of Mashhad were selected as experts and Delphi Panel through Judicial and Snowball Sampling and participated in Delphi Panel and met the dimensions and criteria of good urban governance. They scored and then added or removed some items and then assessed the current status of Mashhad metropolis according to the final dimensions and criteria and identified their strengths and weaknesses. These stakeholders were divided into seven main categories: 1- Khorasan Razavi Governorate 2- Mashhad City Council 3- Mashhad Municipality 4- Astanqods Razavi 5- Private Sector and Economic Activists 6- Popular Organizations, NGOs and others popular institutions 7- University professors and independent scholars and experts in this field. Finally, a good and appropriate model of good urban governance for the city of Mashhad was determined based on the components, dimensions and criteria with each weight, evaluation of the current status of Mashhad based on this model with a score on the components, dimensions and criteria was carried out and the traffic guidelines from the current situation towards the prospect of good urban governance. To validate the results and provide executive solutions, two focus group meetings were held with the selected experts representing the above spectrum and the results were confirmed in Focus Group.
Results and discussion:
After performing the research stages, a suitable model of good urban governance for Mashhad with 3 concepts, 9 dimensions and 30 indicators was obtained and their scores and weight indicating desirable status were calculated. Also, the current status of Mashhad was obtained with respect to these dimensions and indicators. Among the indigenous dimensions of good urban governance for Mashhad, about 70% were from global model dimensions and about 30% were new and proposed by Delphi panel experts. For the indices, about 63% were derived from global model criteria and about 37% were new and proposed by Delphi panel experts. Considering the status score of Mashhad in terms of dimensions and criteria of good urban governance as well as their favorable status scores, the dimensions and criteria that had the most difference between the status quo and desirable were identified that require more effort to fill the status quo. And the combined strategies and executive policies for moving from the current situation to the optimal one were formulated according to the priority of each action.
Conclusion:
Given the divergence between the current and the desired situation, the dimensions and criteria of good urban governance were prioritized by combined measures and strategies and executive policies, and 9 strategies and 11 executive policies were identified as priorities. Strategic topics include integrated planning and implementation of urban government and public bodies, adoption of the integrated urban management bill, maximum transparency through information technology, integrated planning for pilgrimage and tourism, preparation of a comprehensive human capital document, Creating a platform for public participation in urban decision making, Support for public participation electronically, Special planning for the outskirts of Mashhad, Interdisciplinary strategic planning for the prospect of good urban governance. For future research, it is suggested that these indigenous patterns be developed for other metropolises of the country in accordance with the same process, also, in addition to the concepts, dimensions, and criteria, quantifiable sub-indicators can also be achieved for good urban governance in each city and continuously monitor and control these indicators in each city.

Keywords

References

  1. Adineh Vand, Ali Asghar; Hajizadeh, Maryam; Ghadami, Mustafa. (2013). Investigation of municipal performance within the framework of good urban governance (Case study: Babolsar city). Urban Management Journal, spring and summer 2013, Volume 11, Number 31
  2. Ale-eshagh, Parisa; Hodavand, Mehdi. (2013). Investigation of new sources of revenue for municipalities. Comparative Law Research of Iran and International, 6 (22), 1-28.
  3. Batchelor, S; Smith, J; Fleming, J. (2014). RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DECENTRALIZATION (READ(.
  4. Batchelor, s., Smith, j. (2014). TOOLS FOR IMPROVING DECENTRALISED GOVERNANCE OF ENERGY. RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DECENTRALIZATION (READ).
  5. Bidram, rasool. (2011). investigating areas of rent seeking in the budget structure of municipalities and its relation to efficiency; Case study: Metropolitan municipalities. Urban Management Journal. Spring and Summer 2011, Volume 9
  6. Bloom, E., Sunseri, A., & Leonard, A. (2007). Measuring and Strengthening Local Governance Capacity: The Local Governance Barometer.
  7. Borraz, O., & Le Galès, P. (2010). Urban governance in Europe: the government of what? Pôle Sud, (1), 137-151.
  8. Capuno, J. J. (2000). GOFORDEV Index: Advocating good governance for local development. Issues & Letters, 9(5-6).
  9. Capuno, J. J., Garcia, M. M. S., & Sardalla, J. S. (2001). Promoting local development through good governance: A partial assessment of the GOFORDEV Index. Issues & Letters, 10(3),
  10. Da Cruz, N. F., & Marques, R. C. (2017). Structuring composite local governance indicators. Policy Studies, 38(2), 109-129.
  11. Danaiifard, Hassan; Babashahi, Jabar; Azar, Adel; Kurdnaij, Asadallah (2012). Transforming National Welfare: Does Good Governance Play an Important Role? Management Research in Iran, Volume 16, Issue 4
  12. Danesh Jafari, davood; Babajani, Jafar; Karimi Osboei, Samaneh. (2014). Assessment of Stability of Financial Resources and Income of Tehran Municipality. Journal of Urban Economics and Management. 2014; ۲ (۷): ۱۵-۳۴
  13. Department of the Interior and Local Government. (n.d.). Local Governance Performance Management System (LGPMS). Retrieved from http://lgpms.blgs.gov.ph
  14. Dufils, J. (2010). Local Governance Barometer: Measuring Governance in Madagascar. Claasen and Alpin-Lardiés.
  15. Ebrahim zadeh, isa. Asadian, Morteza. (2013). Analysis and Evaluation of the Realization of Good Urban Governance in Iran. Geography and Urban Studies, 2: 1-3
  16. Farrokhi, Ehsan; Nouri Kermani, Ali; Rezaee, Ali Akbar (2014). The Role of Municipalities in Promoting Urban Management with a Neighborhood Approach. Journal of Urban Management Studies. Spring 2014 - Number 17
  17. German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). (2012). Good governance at decentralised level and poverty reduction.
  18. Hashemi, Shahnaz, Shokoohi bidhendi, Roohollah. (2013). Strategies to promote the status of Tehran's urban management to its optimum (Tehran municipality as a social and cultural institution). Urban Management Studies, 5 (Issue 2 (14)), 1-14.
  19. Hashemi, Seyed Ahmad; Abbasi, Abolfazl. (2018). Designing a Citizen Satisfaction Model and Citizens Management Services and Citizenship Channels (Case Study: Pars Special Economic Zone). Urban Planning and Research Quarterly.
  20. Hosseinzadeh, Ali Hossein; Fadaei Deh Cheshmeh, Hamid. (2012). Investigation of Social Factors Affecting Citizen Participation in Urban Affairs (Case Study: Shahrekord). Journal of Urban Sociological Studies (Urban Studies). Winter 2012, Volume 2, Number 5
  21. Kazemian, Gholamreza; Meshkini, Abolfazl; Biglari, Shadi. (2011). Evaluation of Urban Management Performance in Neighborhood Sustainability in District Two of District 4 of Tehran. Journal of Geographical Sciences Applied Research Summer 11, 2011, No. 21.
  22. Kazemian Gholamreza; Haghshenas Kashani, Farideh; Shadmanfar, Reza. (2010). The Effect of Neighborhood Council Model on Citizen Participation with Urban Management. Journal of Urban Management Studies. Fall 2010, Volume 2, Number 3; From page 23 to page 37.
  23. Kazemian, Gholamreza; Shadmanfar, Reza. (2008). Investigating the Participatory Patterns of Councils in Tehran Neighborhoods. Journal of Municipalities July 9, 2008 No. 89.
  24. Kazemian, Gholamreza. (2007). An Introduction to the Model of Urban Governance. Urban Plans. Spring 2007 - Nos. 19 and 20
  25. Khadem al-Husseini, Ahmad; Ghadrjani, Razieh; Zahedi Yeganeh, Amir. (2011). Urban People’s Management and Citizen Participation in Urban Management (Case Study: Isfahan Area 5), ​​Environmental Planning Journal.
  26. Kharazmi, Omid Ali; Beigi Nasrabad, Fatemeh; Johari, Leila. (2016). Analytical study of the gap between the current situation and the desirable status of implementation of the substitution system in Mashhad. Urban Management Studies, 8 (27), 15-28.
  27. Kiani, Akbar; Fazelnia, Gharib; Salari Sardari, Farzali. (2013). Comparative Comparison of Traditional and New Urban Management Approaches in Iran. Research in Urban Ecology. Autumn 2013, page 81-100
  28. Komorowska, D. (2016). Citizen Voice in Afghanistan: Evaluation of National Solidarity Programme III.
  29. Memela, S., Mautjane, B., Nzo, T., & Van Hoof, P. (2008). The State of Local Governance in South Africa: What Does the Local Governance Barometer Tell Us? Idasa.
  30. Moussaie, Meysam; Razavi aleHashem, Behzad. (2010). Citizen Participation in Urban Affairs Swot, Journal of Social Welfare Research, Eleventh Year, No. 41, pp. 152 - 123.
  31. Moretto, L. (2015). Application of the “Urban Governance Index” to water service provisions: Between rhetoric and reality. Habitat international
  32. Naghdi, Assadollah; Kulivand, Shakiba. (2015). Investigation of Citizens' Social Participation in Improvement and Renovation of Urban Worn Textures Journal of Urban Management Studies. Spring 2015 Issue 21
  33. Narang, Shipra, 2005, Disaggregating Governance Indicators: Why Local Governance is Important and How It Can Be Measured, paper presented at the Technical Workshop on Governance Indictors, April 20-22, New Delhi, India.
  34. Nasiri, Ismail. (2015). Evaluation of Axial Area Management Performance on the Efficiency of Favorable Urban Governance Case Study of District 4 of Tehran. Journal of Urban Research and Planning. Volume 6, Number 21, Summer 2015, Page 139-156
  35. Nesari, Reza; Montazeri, Rasoul; Hosseinzadeh, Nemat. (2015). Strategies for financing Tehran municipality in the five year plan with emphasis on communicative policies of the Resistance Economy. Journal of Urban Economics and Management.
  36. NINA, MA., ADRIANO, I., DIOSDADO P, ESTIMADA. (2014). The Effectiveness of the Local Governance Performance Management System (LGPMS) in Improving Governance in the Municipality of San Rafael. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences. Vol. 1
  37. Obeng-Odoom, F. (2012). Land reforms in Africa: Theory, practice, and outcome. Habitat international, 36(1), 161-170.
  38. PACT/ Impact Alliance. (2006). Local Governance Barometer: Implementation Process Handbook
  39. Parhizkar, Akbar; Kazemian, Gholamreza. (2005). Urban Governance Approach and Its Necessity in Tehran Metropolitan Area Management. Journal of Economic Research
  40. Pishgahi Fard Zahra, Ghalibaf, Mohammad Bagher, Moradinia Sajjad, Momeni Hamideh. (2013). The Pathology of Spatial Distribution of Political Power in Tehran Metropolis with Emphasis on Urban Governance. Journal: Geography: Fall 2013, Volume 11, Number 38
  41. Pour Ahmad, Ahmad; Mehdian Behnmiri, Masoumeh; Mehdi, Ali. (2013). An Analysis of the Factors of Non-Realization of Urban Unit Management from the Perspective of Current Laws. Journal of Urban Economics and Management. The first year of spring 2013 No. 2.
  42. Rabbani Khorasgani, Rasool; Varesi, Hamid Reza; Akhavan Mahdavi, Mohsen. (2011). The Role and Position of Information Literacy on Citizens' Electronic Participation in Urban Management (Case Study: Isfahan City). Urban Management Journal. Summer 2011
  43. Rahnamaii, Mohammad Taghi; Mehdi, Ali; Mahdian Behnamiri, Masoumeh. (2014). Investigating and Analyzing the Performance of Urban Management from the Perspective of Local Participation and Citizenship; (Case Study: Babolsar City). Journal: Urban Management: Spring 2014, Volume 13, Number 34
  44. Rahmani, Fatemeh; Mazhari, Mohammad. (2011). Investigating the Rate, Problems, Impacts and Methods of Privatization in Mashhad Municipal Services Deputy. First Conference on Urban Economics, Tehran, 2011.
  45. Rahnama, Mohammad Rahim; Mafi, Ezzatullah; Asadi, Ruh Allah. (2010). Analysis of the Position of Good Urban Governance in Mashhad with SWOT Model. Journal of Geography and Regional Development, No. 15.
  46. RAWOO (Netherlands Development Assistance Research Council) (2005): The urban challenge: A question of knowledge. Rethinking the role of knowledge in poverty alleviation, RAWOO Publication No. 28, The Hague.
  47. Rezaii Kuchi, Mahmoud. (2019). Investigating the Role of Citizen Participation in Increasing Success of Urban Management Case: Shiraz Metropolis. Journal of Urban Research and Planning, 10 (38), 51-62.
  48. Rezaii, Mohammad Reza; shamshiri, Muslim. (2012). Investigating and Evaluating the Position of Good Urban Governance Order in the Management Structure of Shiraz. Fourth conference on urban planning and management. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad.
  49. Roostaii, Shahrivar; Pourmohammadi, Mohammad Reza; Ghanbari, Hakimeh. (2017). Investigating the Structural Role of Good Urban Governance in Creating Smart Cities (Case Study: Tabriz Municipality). Urban Planning and Research Quarterly, 8 (31)
  50. Sadeghi, Seyed Kamal; Mohammadzadeh, Parviz; Sobh Khiz, Shalaleh. (2015). Factors Affecting Private Sector Participation as an Approach to Sustainable Financing of Municipal Projects. Journal of Urban Economics and Management.
  51. Sadeghi, Mojtaba; Rahnama, Mohammad Rahim. (2013). Functional Structural Explanation of Urban Participatory Management (Case Study: Mashhad City). Human Geography Research, Volume 45, Number 1, Spring 2013. Pages 169-184.
  52. Sajjadi, Jila; Yarmoradi, Kiumars ; Kanuni, Reza; Heidari, Morteza. (2017). The Role of Good Governance in Improving the Quality of the Urban Environment from the Perspective of Residents. Journal of Urban Ecology Research. Spring and Summer.
  53. Shafiei, Z. (2011). Contested understanding of urban governance. PhD Thesis. School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape. Newcastle University
  54. Shamaei, Ali; Adineh Vand, Ali Asghar; Hajizadeh, Maryam. (2012). Evaluating the performance of municipalities based on good urban governance. Urban Management Studies Journal, Fall 2012, Volume 4
  55. Shamsuddini, Ali; Sanaei Moghaddam, Soroush; balaghi, Rasool; Rezai, Meysam. (2017). Measuring Citizens' Satisfaction with Municipal Performance and Evaluating Individual, Social Factors Affecting it (Case Study: Dehdasht City). Journal of Urban Research and Planning
  56. Sharzeii, Gholam Ali; Maajed, Wahid. (2011). Sustainable Urban Financing; How to Financing Urban Sustainable Development. Urban Management Journal. Spring and Summer 2011
  57. Stewart, Kennedy, 2006, “Designing good urban governance indicators: The importance of citizen's participation and its evaluation in Greater Vancouver”, Cities, Vol. 23, No. 3
  58. Un-habitat. (2010). State of the world's cities 2010/2011: bridging the urban divide. Earthscan.
  59. UN- HABITAT (2007). Campaign on urban governance. Campaign on urban governance. www.un habitat.org.
  60. UN-HABITAT, 2004, Urban Indicators Guidelines: Monitoring the Habitat Agenda and the Millennium Development Goals, www.unhabitat.org/governance.
  61. UN- HABITAT (2003). The Global Campaign on urban governance. www.un habitat.org.
  62. UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN HABITAT) (2002): Global Campaign on Urban Governance. Concept Paper, 2nd Revised Edition, Nairobi.
  63. UNDP. & UNDP. (2007). Human Devlopment Report 2007/2008. UN.
  64. UNDP. (2004). decentralised governance for development: A combined practice note on decentralisation, local governance and urban/rural development.
  65. UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (UNDP) (2000): Poverty Report 2000: Overcoming Human Poverty, New York.
  66. WORLD BANK (2003): World Development Report 2004: Making Services Work for Poor People, Washington, D.C.
  67. World Bank, (2011), World Development Report.
  68. Zali, Nader, Mehdi Ali, Toorani, Hani; Mahmadian Behnamiri Masoumeh. (2013). An Analysis of the Urban Management Performance of Mahabad City from the Perspective of Citizen Participation and Satisfaction. Journal of Urban Ecology Research. Autumn & Winter 2013, Volume 4, Number 2 (8 consecutive)
  69. Ziyari, Karamatollah; Nikpay, Vahid; Hosseini, Ali (2013), Measuring Citizen Participation in Urban Management Based on Good Urban Governance (Case Study: Yasuj City) Housing and Rural Environment, No. 141, Spring.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 08 September 2019
  • Revise Date: 21 December 2019
  • Accept Date: 22 December 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics