جایگاه مفهوم منفعت عمومی در فرایند شکل گیری مگامال: یک نظریه زمینه ای در خصوص تجربه ساکنین بافت های پیرامونی

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی - کاربردی

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشگر دوره دکتری شهرسازی، دانشکده شهرسازی، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشکده شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

نوشتار حاضر در پی کاوش، تبیین و نظریه‌پردازی در خصوص پیامدهای شکل‌گیری مجتمع‌های تجاری چندمنظوره یا مگامال‌ها بر ساکنین محله‌های مسکونی و بررسی اثرات این پدیده بر منفعت عمومی شهروندان است. بدین منظور از نظریه زمینه‌ای برساخت‌گرای چارماز استفاده شده است. داده‌های مقاله از 15 مصاحبه نیمه‌ساختاریافته با ساکنان محله اکباتان، به عنوان نمونه موردی، گردآوری شده است. برآیند مقاله، نظریه‌ای در خصوص دریافت و درک شهروندان از فرایند احداث مگامال در محله آن‌هاست که در 6 مرحله به ارائه و بازنمایی نحوه مواجهه ساکنین با احداث مگامال و تغییرات ناشی از آن در محله می‌پردازد که عبارتند از: 1. استقبال؛ 2. سلب اعتماد؛ 3. نارضایتی؛ 4. بی‌صدا بودن؛ 5. دریغ و حسرت؛ 6. پذیرش مشروط. در خلال هر مرحله اثرات اقدامات و مداخلات برنامه‌ریزی شهری و نهادهای عمومی بر منافع و ادراک شهروندان از نحوه استیفای آن کاوش شده است. نتایج حاصل از این مقاله نشان می‌دهد که درک و دریافت شهروندان از میزان استیفاء یا عدم استیفای منفعت عمومی امری ثابت و از پیش تعیین شده نیست و در هر مرحله از فرایند توسعه، و مبتنی بر اقدامات و رویکردهای ذی‌نفعان گوناگون، و تجارب شهروندان متفاوت است. همچنین بر مبنای یافته‌های مقاله، موضوع منفعت عمومی در برنامه‌ریزی شهری، مفهومی بین‌الاذهانی و برساخته ذهن افراد جامعه است، از این رو مناسب-ترین رویکرد دستیابی بدان، رویکرد گفتگویی است. در ادامه و بر اساس یافته‌های مقاله، ماهیت و ویژگی‌های منفعت عمومی در برنامه‌ریزی شهری مورد بحث و بررسی قرار گرفته و پیشنهاداتی برای استفاده در طرح‌های توسعه‌ شهری ارائه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The role of public interest in megamall formation: A constructivist grounded theory of the neighboring residents’ experiences

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nayereh Dayarian 1
  • Farshad Nourian 2
1 PhD. Candidate of Urban, Planning, School of Urban Planning, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran
2 Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Tehran
چکیده [English]

Megamalls are among the large-scale projects that have various economic, social, and cultural effects and consequences on the cities. Therefore, given the increasing growth of their construction in recent years, megamalls are considered among the most challenging urban issues. Therefore, the present study seeks to explore, explain and theorize about the consequences of the formation of multi-purpose commercial complexes in residential neighborhoods and for their inhabitants. Also, it seeks to study the effects of this phenomenon on the public interest of citizens. For this purpose, Charmaz's constructivist grounded theory has been used. The data were collected from 15 semi-structured interviews with residents of Ekbatan neighborhood, as a case study. In addition, field observations and existing documents and discourse materials have been used as study data. The result of the article is a theory about the citizens' perception and understanding of the process of constructing megamalls in their neighborhood, which in 6 stages presents how residents face the construction of megamalls. These stages also provide the resulting changes in the neighborhood, which are: 1. Appreciation; 2. Loss of trust; 3. Dissatisfaction; 4. Being silent; 5. Nostalgia; 6. Conditional acceptance. In each stage, the effects of actions and interventions of urban planning and public institutions on the interests of citizens and citizens' perception of how to use the stage are explored. Based on this, the perception of satisfying and securing the public interest in urban planning requires focusing on discourse as a tool to reach agreement and consensus.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Public interest
  • Megamalls
  • Citizens'
  • perception
  • Constructivist grounded theory

مراجع

  1. Abbas, K. A. (2004). Framework for assessing traffic impacts generated by mega complexes: a case study of San Stefano grand plaza, Egypt. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22 (4), 311-325.
  2. Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions Chicago. IL: University of Chicago.
  3. Alexander, E. R. (2002). The public interest in planning: From legitimation to substantive plan evaluation. Planning theory, 1 (3), 226-249/
  4. Alexander, E. (2003, July). Planning Rights: What They Are, and How Planners Deal with Them. In Third Joint Congress AESOP-ACSP, Leuven) pp. 8-12).
  5. Alexander, E. R. (2010). Planning, policy and the public interest: Planning regimes and planners' ethics and practices. International Planning Studies, 15 (2),143-162.
  6. Approvals of the Article 5 Commission of Tehran Municipality. (2007). Paragraph 9 of the meeting minutes, No. 446. [In Persian].
  7. Arendt, H. (1968) Truth and Politics. Between Past and Future.
  8. Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (2002). Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory, 1 (2), 163187.
  9. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory.
  10. Charmaz, K. (2018) Living with Lupus: Women in Chronic Illness in Ecuador. Ann Miles, Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2013. 184 pp.
  11. Charmaz, K. (214). Constructing grounded theory.
  12. Chettiparamb, A. (2016). Articulating ‘public interest’through complexity theory. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34 (7), 1284-1305.
  13. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Sage Publications, Inc.
  14. Dictionary, W. (2020). https://www.merriam-webster.com. Accessed December 3, 2020. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/interest.
  15. Erkip, F. (2005). The rise of the shopping mall in Turkey: the use and appeal of a mall in Ankara. Cities, 22 (2), 89-108.
  16. Ferreira, D., & Paiva, D. (2017). The death and life of shopping malls: an empirical investigation on the dead malls in Greater Lisbon. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 27 (4), 317-333.
  17. Flick, U. (2018). Designing qualitative research.
  18. Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and power: Democracy in practice. University of Chicago press.
  19. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge university press.
  20. Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N., & Rothengatter, (2003). Megaprojects and risk: An anatomy of ambition. Cambridge university press.
  21. Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the Face of Power. (Berkeley, University of California).
  22. Friedmann, J. (1973). RETRACKING AMERICA; A THEORY OF TRANSACTIVE PLANNING.
  23. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. mill valley.
  24. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.
  25. Gleye, P. H. (2015). City planning versus urban planning: resolving a profession’s bifurcated heritage. Journal of planning literature, 30 (1), 3-17.
  26. Gonzalez-Mathiesen, C., & March, A. (2018). Establishing design principles for wildfire resilient urban planning. Planning Practice & Research, 33 (2). 97-119.
  27. Grant, J. (2005). Rethinking the public interest as a planning concept. Plan Canada, 45 (2), 48-50.
  28. Heywood, P. (1990). Social justice and planning for the public interest. Urban Policy and Research, 8 (2), 60-68.
  29. Howe, E. (1992). Professional roles and the public interest in planning. Journal of Planning Literature. 6 (3), 230-248.
  30. Howe, E. (1994). Acting on ethics in city planning. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
  31. Howe, E., & Kaufman, J. (1979). The ethics of contemporary American planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45 (3), 243-255.
  32. Iran Manesh, M., & Mokhtari, B. (2014). Ekbatanis in pursuit of the right to the city: a look at newly born urban activism in Ekbatan town. Seven Cities, 4 (50-49), 247-239. [In Persian].
  33. Izadpanah, M., & Habibi, M. (2017). Analysis and evaluation of the place of goods as a public space, a case study: Palladium Mall, Tehran. Journal of Sustainable City, 1 (4), 37-56. [In Persian].
  34. Kardes, I., Ozturk, A., Cavusgil, S. T., & Cavusgil, E. (2013). Managing global megaprojects: Complexity and risk International Business Review, 22 (6), 905-917.
  35. Kazemi, A., & Amirbrahimi, M. (2017). Studying the cultural and social aspects of mega malls and large commercial complexes. Tehran: Tehran Center for Studies and Planning. [In Persian].
  36. Kazemi, A., & Amirbrahimi, M. (2018). Typology of commercial complexes in Tehran. Cultural and Communication Studies, 56, 11-43. [In Persian].
  37. Kelle, U. (2007). The Development of Categories: Different Approaches in Grounded Theory. The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory.
  38. Kipp, A., Riemer, K., & Wiemann, S.(2008). IT mega projects: What they are and why they are special.
  39. Klosterman, R. E. (1980). A public interest criterion. Journal of the American Planning Association, 46 (3), 323-333.
  40. Lowry, K. (1994). The legitimation of planning. Planning Theory.
  41. Lucy, W. H. (1988). APA's ethical principles include simplistic planning theories. Journal of the American Planning Association, 54 (2), 147-149.
  42. Maidment, C. (2016). In the public interest? Planning in the Peak District national park. Planning theory, 15 (4), 366-388.
  43. McLean, B. L., & Borén, T. (2015). Barriers to implementing sustainability locally: A case study of policy Local Environment, 20 (12), 1489-1506.
  44. Mills, J., Bonner, A., & Francis, K. (2006). The development of constructivist grounded theory. International journal of qualitative methods, 5 (1), 25-35.
  45. Moroni, S. (2004). Towards a reconstruction of the public interest criterion. Planning Theory, 3 (2), 151-171.
  46. Morse, J. (2007). Qualitative Sampling. The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory: paperback edition. Pp (229244). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
  47. Naderi, A., & Hosseini, Sh. (2015). Tehran under the siege of capitalism: a case study of Koroosh commercial, cultural and entertainment complex. Iranian Anthropological Research, 6 (2), 92-113. [In Persian].
  48. Orueta, F. D., & Fainstein, S. S. (2008). The new mega‐projects: genesis and impacts. International journal of urban and regional research, 32 (4), 759-767.
  49. Piran, Parvez. (1376). Conceptual and theoretical bases of participation. Tehran: Planning Research Institute. [In Persian].
  50. Puustinen, S., Mäntysalo, R., & Jarenko, (2017). The varying interpretations of public interest: Making sense of finnish urban planners’ conceptions. Current Urban Studies, 5 (1), 2-8.
  51. Rao, F. (2020). Shopping centre morphologies in transition: towards a morphological typology of retail synergies. Urban Design International, 25 (4), 310-327.
  52. Sandercock, L., & Dovey, K. (2002). Pleasure, politics, and the" public interest": Melbourne's riverscape American Planning Association. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68 (2),1-15.
  53. Seyed Al-Hosseini, S. M., & Vostoukian, N. (2011). Investigating the amount of travel attraction of city-scale commercial centers outside the central area (case example: Almas Sharq Mashhad commercial complex). The 12th International Conference on Transportation and Traffic. [In Persian].
  54. Shia, I., & Hajiani, M. (2018). The effects of mega-malls on neighborhood identity in Tehran; Case study: Niavaran's property atlas. Iranian Islamic City Studies, 36, 69-79. [In Persian].
  55. Singh, S., & Estefan, A. (2018). Selecting a grounded theory approach for nursing research. Global qualitative nursing research, 5, 2333393618799571
  56. Staeheli, L. A., & Mitchell, D. (2006). USA's destiny? Regulating space and creating community in American shopping Urban studies, 43 (5), 977-992.
  57. Stern, P. N. (1980). Grounded theory methodology: Its uses and processes. Image, 12 (1), 20-23.
  58. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques (pp. 1-312). Thousand oaks, CA: Sage
  59. Szymańska, A. I., & Płaziak, M. (2017). Consumer preferences and behaviour in shopping malls in Poland with the particular reference to Krakow. Problemy Rozwoju Miast, 55, 33-44.
  60. Taylor, N. (2017). Environmental issues and the public interest. In Values and planning (pp. 87-115). Routledge.
  61. Uddin, M., Hasan, M. R., Ahmed, I., Das, P., Uddin, M. A., & Hasan, T. (2012). A comprehensive study on trip attraction rates of shopping centers in dhanmondi area. International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering, 12 (4), 12-16.
  62. Warrack, A. A. (1993). Megaproject decision making. lessons and strategies.
  63. Xiao, J., Tait, M., & Kang, J. (2018). A perceptual model of smellscape pleasantness. Cities, 76, 105-115.
  64. Zamani, B., & Babaei, E. (2021). A Critical Review of Grounded Theory Research in Urban Planning and Design. Planning Practice & Research, 36 (1), 77-90.
  65. Zhang, L., Zhou, J., Hui, E. C., & Wen, H.(2019). The effects of a shopping mall on housing prices: A case study in Hangzhou. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 23 (1), 65-80.
پژوهش‌های جغرافیای برنامه‌ریزی شهری
دوره 10، شماره 1
اردیبهشت 1401
صفحه 121-142

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار