An Emergent Urban Planning Theoretical Framework; A Complexity Approach Case Study: New Town of Pardis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Urban Planning and Design, School of Architecture and Environmental Design, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. candidate, Department of Urban Planning and Design, School of Architecture and Environmental Design, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In recent decades, the urban areas have gone through fundamental changes due to the development of new technologies, global reorganization of relations, and environmental risks which have resulted in a new outlook on the roles of center and periphery, definitions of space and place, mobility, etc. Dealing with these changes requires new approaches for understanding urban areas and redefinition of various related concepts. Approaches that are capable of taking into account the unpredictable dynamics and the complexity of urban challenges. Complexity and its theories have been used to provide a framework for understanding the new dynamics and their chaotic nature and unpredictability. In this regard, one of the approaches is to consider cities and urban areas as complex interwoven networks within the framework of complexity thinking, in which city dynamics are relational, emergent and contextual and generated by networks comprised of various actors and their relations. This study reviews the theoretical basis of the complexity approach, conceptualizing the notion of urban complexity and its corresponding concepts such as networks, actors, and relations. This study aims to propose a theoretical framework for urban studies that are carried out with a complexity approach. To achieve this, firstly, the article elaborates on the complexity approach and its related concepts such as complex networks, social networks, and actors and then focuses specifically on the manifestations of complexity in urban contexts. Building on these, the article goes on to propose a theoretical framework for urban planning. Finally, in order to clarify the use of such a framework, a case study built on the proposed framework is introduced. The case reviews the latest comprehensive plan of the new town of Pardis and conceptualizes the realizations of the plans. The theoretical framework is proposed using a logical thinking process including different stages of identifying the role of planner/researcher, the choice of theory, developing a working knowledge of the theory, and defining how the theory connects to the research objective. The step-by-step process is embedded in the structure of the article. Regarding the case study, in accordance with the proposed theoretical framework, critical realism paradigm and its process of analysis has been used to conceptualize how the plan has shaped and is linked to the real-life observations in the new town of Pardis. Based on the findings, the most important principle in enabling urban planning in giving order to the dynamic, social, uncontrollable and self-organized system of the cities is the identification of relations and interdependencies between the actors, which can include various aspects, such as different types of relations and centrality, depending on the researcher’s goal. The stepping stone to achieving this is to identify the actors and the networks present in the study context accurately and as extensively as possible. This approach also necessitates the redefinition of the role and function of planners, since in the proposed framework, planners are regarded as one of the actors in the network as well, but with an exceptional positioning, enabling them to either facilitate or impede the flows of relations within the network.

Keywords

References

-                اسدی، ایرج (1382). پیچیدگی مسائل در برنامه‌ریزی شهری و رویکردهای مواجهه با آن. فصلنامه مدیریت شهری، 14، 24- 35. 
-                دانایی‌فرد، حسن (1384). کنکاشی در مبانی فلسفی تئوری پیچیدگی: آیا علم پیچیدگی صبغه پست مدرنیست دارد؟ فصلنامه مدرس علوم انسانی- پژوهش‌های مدیریت در ایران، 46، 171- 211. 
 
-                Asher, H. B., Weisberg, H. F., Shively, W. P., & Kessel, J. H. (Eds.). (1984). Theory-building and Data Analysis in the Social Sciences. Midwest Political Science Association (U.S.): University of Tennessee Press.
-                Babaei, H., Rafiyan, M., Rousta, M., & Pasian Khamari, R. (2018). Analysis of Organizatinal network of participatory management in urban renaissance of Gorgans historical context. Bagh-e Nazar, 15 (63), 17-32.
-                Bar-Yam, Y. (2015). Complex Systems Science: Where Does It Come from and Where Is It Going To? Retrieved 12 December, 2016 from http://www.necsi.edu/research/overview/ccs15.html.
-                Bettencourt, L. M. (2013). The Kind of Problem a City Is. Santa Fe Institute Working Paper.
-                Boonstra, B., & Boelens, L. (2011). Self-organization in urban development: towards a new perspective on spatial planning. Urban Research & Practice, 4 (2), 99-122.
-                Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. C. (2003). The Network Paradigm in Organizational Research: A Review and Typology. Journal of Management, 29 (6), 991–1013.
-                Bouchareb, A. (2011). Lecture: Project Urbain: Définitions, Acteurs, Stratgie. Retrieved from Universite Mentouri-Constantine https://en.calameo.com/read/00401606376c2129db85a.
-                Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-                Chen, Y. (2011). Fractal systems of central places based on intermittency of space-filling. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 44 (8), 619-632.
-                Crooks, A. T., Patel, A., & Wise, S. (2013). Multi-agent systems for urban planning. In N. N. Pinto (Ed.), Technologies for Urban and Spatial Planning: Virtual Cities and Territories: Virtual Cities and Territories (29-57). Hershey PA: IGI Global.
-                Danermark, B., Ekstrom, M., Jakobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. C. (2002). Explaining Society: Critical Realism in the Scoial Sciences. London: Routledge.
                  e Roo, G. (2010). Planning and complexity: An introduction . In G. de Roo, & E. A. Silva, A Planner’s encounter with complexity (1- 19). Surrey: Ashgate Publishing limited.
-                de Roo, G., & Silva, E. A. (2010). A Planner’s Encounter with Complexity. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
-                Fletcher, A. J. (2017). Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20 (2), 181-194.
-                Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting, and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in dissertation research. Administrative Issues Journal:Education, Practice & Research, 4 (2), 12-26.
-                Healey, P. (2007). Urban complexity and spatial strategies: Towards a relational planning for our times. United Kingdom: Routledge.
-                Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S., & Bastian, M. (2014). ForceAtlas2, a Continuous Graph Layout Algorithm for Handy Network Visualization Designed for the Gephi Software. PLOS One, 9 (6), e98679.
-                Jessop, B. (2001). The governance of complexity and the complexity of governance. Retrieved 2 January, 2018 from http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/resources/sociology-online-papers/papers/jessop-governance-of-complexity.pdf.
-                Kauffman, S. (2002). Investigations. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
-                Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: a few clarifications. Soziale Welt, 47, 369–381.
-                Lima, M. (2015). A Visual History of Human Knowledge. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/manuel_lima_a_visual_history_of_human_knowledge.
-                McAdams, M. A. (2008). Complexity Theory and Urban Planning. Urbana: Urban Affairs and Public Policy, 9, 1-16.
-                Partanen, J. (2009). Simulation in steering of complexity and self-organization in city. Retrieved 26 April, 2016 from http://urbaneco.washington.edu/wp/wp-content/uploads/PARTANEN_0924.pdf.
-                Portugali, J. (2007). A Structural-Cognitive Approach to Urban Simulation Models. In S. Albeverio, D. Andrey, P. Giordano, & A. Vancheri (Eds.), The Dynamics of Complex Urban Systems: An Interdisciplinary Approach (357- 373). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.
-                Portugali, J. (2016). What Makes Cities Complex? In Juval Portugali and Egbert Stolk (Eds.) Complexity, Cognition, Urban Planning and Design (3-19). New York: Springer.
-                Santa Fe Institute. (2013, June 20). Cities are a new kind of complex system: part star, part network. Retrieved 2 April, 2017 from https://www.santafe.edu/news-center/news/science-bettencourt-cities-framework.
-                Trochim, W. M. (2006). Positivism & Post-Positivism. Retrieved 4 August, 2017 from https://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/positvsm.php
-                Villeneuve, P., Trudelle, C., Pelletier, M., & Thériault, M. (2006). Acteurs urbains en conflit, Québec, 1965-2000 : essai d’analyse statistique. Géocarrefour, 81 (2), 135-141.
Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning
Volume 13, Issue 31
July 2021
Pages 23-41

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics