Volume 3, Issue 6 (5-2025)
JORS 2025, 3(6): 76-85 |
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:
Saboonchi P, Rafiei V. Evaluating the Role of Stakeholders in Urban Policy-Making Based on Good Urban Governance
(A Case Study of the Development Plan of Camp B in Bandar Imam Khomeini). , JORS. 2025; 3 (6) :76-85
URL: http://jors-sj.com/article-1-73-en.html
URL: http://jors-sj.com/article-1-73-en.html
Abstract: (2163 Views)
In recent years, the ineffectiveness of urban development plans, particularly in marginalized areas, has stemmed from the absence of effective stakeholder participation and the unilateral decision-making of powerful institutions. The Camp B (Sabbaghan Neighborhood) development project in Bandar Imam Khomeini is a prime example of such a top-down policy-making approach. Although designed by the Housing Foundation to organize the area's informal settlements, the project ultimately failed to improve the quality of life for its residents.
This research aims to analyze the role and position of stakeholders throughout the policy-making and planning process of this project. To do so, it utilizes a public policy cycle framework (in five stages) and a power-interest matrix to classify and evaluate the actor groups involved. The roles of stakeholder groups at each stage are assessed, and the factors that led to changes in their roles and positions, along with the implications of altered interactive structures among the actors, are analyzed.
The research methodology is qualitative, based on content analysis and a case study approach. Data was collected through interviews with key actors, analysis of official documents, and field observations. Findings indicate that the housing foundation, acting as a key and monopolistic player under the supervision of higher-level institutions, marginalized or eliminated the roles of other stakeholders -including the municipality, local organizations, universities, and residents-from the decision-making and implementation processes. This exclusion led to significant damage across four dimensions: institutional, economic, socio-psychological, and physical-spatial. These consequences include the centralization of power, a lack of trust and a sense of belonging, a shift from social justice to profit-driven motives, and incoherence in design and implementation.
The power-interest matrix also reveals a serious disconnect between formal power and the actual needs of the local community. Overall, the lack of multi-level governance structures and effective inter-sectoral interaction were the main factors behind the failure of this development project.
This research aims to analyze the role and position of stakeholders throughout the policy-making and planning process of this project. To do so, it utilizes a public policy cycle framework (in five stages) and a power-interest matrix to classify and evaluate the actor groups involved. The roles of stakeholder groups at each stage are assessed, and the factors that led to changes in their roles and positions, along with the implications of altered interactive structures among the actors, are analyzed.
The research methodology is qualitative, based on content analysis and a case study approach. Data was collected through interviews with key actors, analysis of official documents, and field observations. Findings indicate that the housing foundation, acting as a key and monopolistic player under the supervision of higher-level institutions, marginalized or eliminated the roles of other stakeholders -including the municipality, local organizations, universities, and residents-from the decision-making and implementation processes. This exclusion led to significant damage across four dimensions: institutional, economic, socio-psychological, and physical-spatial. These consequences include the centralization of power, a lack of trust and a sense of belonging, a shift from social justice to profit-driven motives, and incoherence in design and implementation.
The power-interest matrix also reveals a serious disconnect between formal power and the actual needs of the local community. Overall, the lack of multi-level governance structures and effective inter-sectoral interaction were the main factors behind the failure of this development project.
Editorial: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2025/07/1 | Accepted: 2025/09/16 | Published: 2025/10/1
Received: 2025/07/1 | Accepted: 2025/09/16 | Published: 2025/10/1
References
1. Agherian, E., Nabatinejad, M., & Zackery, A. (2024). Development of a Model for Urban Governance Based on Citizen Participation. Strategic Research on Social Problems, 13(2), 47-68.
2. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224. [DOI:10.1080/01944366908977225]
3. Boskabadi, F., Rajaei, Z., Zareh Sadaki, B. (2022). Investigating the effects sustainable Urban Development on Urban Sovereignty. 2(1), 43-76.
4. Citaristi, I. (2022). United nations human settlements programme-UN-habitat. In The Europa Directory of International Organizations 2022 (pp. 240-243). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781003292548-51]
5. Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking 'Participation': models, meanings, and practices. Community development journal, 43(3), 269-283. [DOI:10.1093/cdj/bsn010]
6. Dye, T. R. (1992). Understanding public policy. (No Title).
7. Ebrahimian, B., Taheri, A., Rezaee, S. A., Miri, M. & Mohtadi, M. (2024). Research Trends in the Field of Multi-Level Governance. Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 10(4), 173-186.
8. Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139192675]
9. Fung, A., & Wright, E. O. (2001). Deepening democracy: Innovations in empowered participatory governance. Politics & society, 29(1), 5-41. [DOI:10.1177/0032329201029001002]
10. Ghaderi, E., Keaei, B., Faghihi, A., & Mohmoudzadeh, S. M. (2024). Identifying and analyzing dimensions and components of tourism destination governance with an entrepreneurial approach using the importance-performance matrix. Iranian Pattern of Progress, 12(1), 165-193. 20.1001.1.23295599.1403.12.1.7.5
11. Habitat, U. N. (2005). Urban governance index: Conceptual foundation and field test report. Nairobi: UN Habitat.
12. Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy sciences, 36(2), 175-195. [DOI:10.1023/A:1024834510939]
13. Healey, P. (1996). The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formation. Environment and Planning B: Planning and design, 23(2), 217-234. [DOI:10.1068/b230217]
14. Hosseinabadi, M., & Sharifzadegan, M. H. (2021). An analysis of the conflict of interest in the State in charge of urban spatial planning. Motaleate Shahri, 10(39), 3-14. 10.34785/J011.2021.810
15. Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Perl, A. (1995). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems (Vol. 163). Toronto: Oxford University Press.
16. Jenkins-Smith, H. C., & Sabatier, P. A. (1994). Evaluating the advocacy coalition framework. Journal of Public Policy, 14(2), 175-203. [DOI:10.1017/S0143814X00007431]
17. Karkhaneh, F., Yosofvand, H. R., & Dehghan, H. (2022). Sociological Explanation of the Consequences of Socio-Economic Inequality in the Western Provinces of the Country (Ilam, Kurdistan, and Kermanshah cities). Quarterly Journal of Socio-Cultural Development Studies, 11(1), 149-174.
18. khademi-kouhi, M., dehgan, M., Zolfagari, S. M., Khademi Kouhi, R. and Raei, M. (2023). Global governance, the American empire starting with the media empire. Journal of Political Strategy, 7(3), 59-73.
19. Kooiman, J. (2004). Governing as governance. International Public Management Journal, 7(3), 439-442.
20. Malekshahi, G., Nikpour, A., & Gholami, S. (2019). Understanding and Assessment of Factors Affecting Citizens' Participation in Urban Management. Sociology of Social Institutions, 5(12), 327-350. doi: 10.22080/ssi.1970.2142
21. Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the smart city: a review of the literature on smart urban governance. International review of administrative sciences, 82(2), 392-408. [DOI:10.1177/0020852314564308]
22. Mesa-Vieira, C., Gonzalez-Jaramillo, N., Díaz-Ríos, C., Pano, O., Meyer, S., Menassa, M., ... & Frahsa, A. (2023). Urban Governance, Multisectoral Action, and Civic Engagement for Population Health, Wellbeing, and Equity in Urban Settings: A Systematic Review. International journal of public health, 68, 1605772. [DOI:10.3389/ijph.2023.1605772]
23. Moslemi Mehni, Y. (2018). URBAN POLICY IN IRAN: INTRODUCE AN APPLIED MODEL (CASE STUDY: METROPOLIS KERMAN CITY). POLITICAL QUARTERLY, 48(1), 163-173.
24. Nasiri, Y., Davoodpour, Z., & Moeini Far, M. (2021). The theory of participatory urban planning and the conditions for its realization in the urban planning system of Iran. Quarterly of Geography & Regional Planning, 11(42), 693-714. []
25. Nuh, M., Mawardi, M. K., Parmawati, R., & Abdillah, Y. (2024). Collaborative Governance Model In Sustainable Village Tourism Development (Case Study: Kemiren Village Tourism In Ijen Crater Geopark Cultural Site). Calitatea, 25(199), 310-318. [DOI:10.47750/QAS/25.199.34]
26. PNUD. (2014). Discussion paper: Governance for Sustainable Development. Integrating Governance in the Post-2015 Development Framework.
27. Qaderi, M., Sepehrnia, R., Salehi Amiri, R., & Rezaie, A. (2022). The Implication of Human Capital and Sporting Events in Islamic Republic of Iran Cultural Diplomacy. Organizational Behavior Management in Sport Studies, 9(2), 83-92.
28. Rhodes, R. A. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity, and accountability. Open University.
29. Rostaei, S., Asghari Zamani, A., & Andesta, F. (2024). Explaining the model of neighborhood management using the theory of good urban governance (case study: Tabriz metropolis). Journal of Economic Geography Research, 5(15), 33-53.
30. Saninović, D., & Williams, L. (2021). Factors influencing participation in cultural minority festivals in Australia. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, 11(3), 342-358.
31. Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2007). A guide to the advocacy coalition framework. Handbook of public policy analysis: theory, politics, and methods, 123. [DOI:10.1201/9781420017007.pt3]
32. Yarmohamadian, N. (2021). urban political economy. Encyclopedia of Economics, 3(1), 1-1. urban political economy
33. Zangisheieh, S., Rafiean, M., Ghaedrahmati, S., & Meshkini, A. (2021). Communicative Planning Governance Network, sustainable regeneration slum textures (case study: Kermanshah city). Human Geography Research, 53(4), 1165-1190.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |