Using Backcasting Approach in Developing a Roadmap for Tehran’s Vision

Document Type : Research article

Authors

Department of Urban Planning and Management, School of Urban Planning, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jurbangeo.2023.362508.1846

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Backcasting is a normative, target-oriented, and problem-solving approach, focusing on the desirable future vision and looking back for how to achieve it. Despite the growing global attention to backcasting and its efficiency in various fields, this approach has not been considered in urban planning and facing the complex issues and evolvements of the city in Iran. Therefore, this article uses the backcasting approach to develop a roadmap for Tehran’s vision. The presumption of this study from the desirable future vision is the same as that compiled in Tehran’s Strategic-Structural (Comprehensive) Plan. Thus, it indicates applying expert-based backcasting by stepping back from Tehran’s desirable future vision on the horizon of 2026 to the origin of the current situation in 2006. The ideals of the development perspective in the seven pillars have been scrutinized as the desirable future vision. Studying the current situation has been done by the qualitative content analysis of the document of Tehran’s Comprehensive Plan. Then, the roadmap was followed by defining key steps and targets, essentially placed in three distinct categories. Accordingly, Tehran’s desirable future vision will be realized through the pathway of three short visions, including “Tehran is aware of its existential nature with comprehensive knowledge about facilities and limitations for consolidation and modification,” “Tehran is the capacity builder for infrastructure and facility services, socially and organizationally capable, and prepared to all-round development,” and “Tehran is a prosperous and sustainable regarding cohesion and resilience, wealthy concerning the quality of life, and influential on a transnational level.”
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Backcasting is a normative, target-oriented, and problem-solving approach, focusing on the desirable future vision and looking back for how to achieve it. Despite the growing global attention to backcasting and its efficiency in various fields, this approach has not been considered in urban planning and facing the complex issues and evolvements of the city in Iran. Therefore, this article uses the backcasting approach to develop a roadmap for Tehran’s vision. There is a difference between predictive, explorative, and normative methods that seek to study probable, possible, and preferable futures. In this way, the backcasting is distinguished from other future studies approaches. Forecasting goes from the present to the future, but backcasting starts from the future and connects to the present. Hence, backcasting as a process and not a method involves identifying a preferable future with desired goals aspired by the planning client and creating milestones or decisive steps on the pathway from that desirable future vision back to the present. It is relevant when short-term directional studies and longer-term forecasts indicate that the goals and targets will not be achieved within the designated time.
 
Methodology
The backcasting approach can be classified as expert-based backcasting, participative backcasting, and interactive backcasting. Expert-based backcasting focuses on the technical analysis of future policy recommendations in a top-down process. In contrast, participative and interactive backcasting mainly emphasize defining future visioning in a bottom-up manner. After defining the desirable future vision in the first phase, the second phase is to look back to the present, study, and analyze the current situation compared to that vision. Accordingly, in the third phase, a roadmap is developed, including decisive steps and key targets providing short visions to achieve the end vision. The presumption of this study from the desirable future vision is the same as that compiled in Tehran’s Strategic-Structural (Comprehensive) Plan. Thus, it indicates applying expert-based backcasting by stepping back from Tehran’s desirable future vision on the horizon of 2026 to the origin of the current situation in 2006. The ideals of the development perspective in the seven pillars have been scrutinized as the desirable future vision. Studying the current situation under the mentioned pillars has been done by the qualitative content analysis of the document of Tehran’s Comprehensive Plan, including 11 volumes or main study areas. Then, the roadmap was followed by defining key steps and targets, essentially placed in three distinct categories.
 
Results and discussion
The seven pillars of the desirable future vision include “Iranian-Islamic originality and identity,” “intelligence, smartness, and globality,” “greenness, beauty, and vitality,” “security and resistance against crises and risks,” “structural stability and coherence,” “prosperous, well-equipped, and fair,” and “centralized with national and global functions.” According to the pillars mentioned above, studying the current situation is the result of the content analysis of the plan and the inspection of the instances included in it, which generally have a physical-spatial nature and mainly indicate the inappropriateness of the context resulted in the occurrence of widespread functional disorders in Tehran. Accordingly, the roadmap to realize Tehran’s desirable future vision has been developed based on the current situation following the framework of the seven pillars. This roadmap includes normative key steps and targets, and their number varies in the pathway of connecting the current situation to the desirable future vision in the seven pillars. It means that in achieving the desirable future vision from the current situation, the number and priority of the steps and targets could differ depending on the pillars’ nature.
 
Conclusion
Accordingly, Tehran’s desirable future vision will be realized through the pathway of three short visions, including “Tehran is aware of its existential nature with comprehensive knowledge about facilities and limitations for consolidation and modification,” “Tehran is the capacity builder for infrastructure and facility services, socially and organizationally capable, and prepared to all-round development,” and “Tehran is a prosperous and sustainable regarding cohesion and resilience, wealthy concerning the quality of life, and influential on a transnational level.” By forecasting the current situation, these visions and targets could be considered as a basis for backcasting for a constant and continuous pathway towards the gradual realization of the desirable future vision and, simultaneously, as a topic for further related research. Meanwhile, using participatory and interactive backcasting approaches in differentiating or complementing expert-based ones is a significant field for study in the future.
 
Authors’ Contribution
All authors contributed equally to the preparation of this manuscript.
 
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
 
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
 
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and constructive remarks.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Keywords


  1. Abou Jaoude, G., Mumm, O., & Carlow, V. M. (2022). An overview of scenario approaches: a guide for urban design and planning. Journal of Planning Literature37(3), 467-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122221083546
  2. Aoki, K., Kishita, Y., Nakamura, H., & Masuda, T. (2020). The use of backcasting to promote urban transformation to sustainability: The case of Toyama City, Japan. In: Saito, O., Subramanian, S., Hashimoto, S., Takeuchi, K. (Eds.) Managing Socio-ecological Production Landscapes and Seascapes for Sustainable Communities in Asia. (pp. 45-66). Science for Sustainable Societies. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1133-2_4
  3. Arbab, P. (2022). Exploring the substantial reasons for the inefficiency of urban planning based on comprehensive plans approach (Case study: Nowshahr’s Comprehensive Plan). Town and Country Planning14(1), 61-93. https://doi.org/10.22059/jtcp.2021.332798.670267 [in Persian]
  4. Behzadfar, M. (2014). Plans and Programs in Urban Development. Shahr Press. [in Persian]
  5. Bibri, S. E. (2018). Backcasting in futures studies: A synthesized scholarly and planning approach to strategic smart sustainable city development. European Journal of Futures Research6, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-018-0142-z
  6. Bibri, S. E. (2020). A methodological framework for futures studies: integrating normative backcasting approaches and descriptive case study design for strategic data-driven smart sustainable city planning. Energy Informatics3, 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42162-020-00133-5
  7. Bibri, S. E., & Krogstie, J. (2019). A scholarly backcasting approach to a novel model for smart sustainable cities of the future: Strategic problem orientation. City. Territory and Architecture6, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-019-0102-3
  8. Damsø, T., Christensen, T. B., & Kjær, T. (2014). Back to the Future: A backcasting based approach to planning for an energy system transition in the Danish region of Zealand. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies13(2), 12-23.
  9. Dreborg, K. H. (1996). Essence of backcasting. Futures, 28(9), 813-828. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(96)00044-4
  10. Eames, M., Dixon, T., May, T., & Hunt, M. (2013). City futures: Exploring urban retrofit and sustainable transitions. Building Research & Information41(5), 504-516. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2013.805063
  11. Ebadinejad, M, Taheri Demneh, M, & Zackery, A. (2022). Backcasting for the smart city in horizon 1420 Case study: Isfahan city. Journal of Future Cities Vision, 2 (4),1-23. [in Persian]
  12. González-González, E., Cordera, R., Stead, D., & Nogués, S. (2023). Envisioning the driverless city using backcasting and Q-methodology. Cities133, 104159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104159
  13. Hadi Zonooz, B. (2016). Assessment of Implantation of Urban Plans in Tehran. HAFTSHAHR4(53-54), 8-35. [in Persian]
  14. Hajiani, E. (2016). Strategic research methodology to design and develop the desired pattern. Strategy25(1), 5-28. [in Persian]
  15. Hines, A., Schutte, J., & Romero. M. (2019). Transition scenarios via backcasting. Journal of Futures Studies24(1), 1-14.
  16. Höjer, M., & Mattsson, L. G. (2000). Determinism and backcasting in future studies. Futures32(7), 613-634. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(00)00012-4
  17. Holmberg, J., & Robèrt, K. H. (2000). Backcasting—A framework for strategic planning. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology7(4), 291-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504500009470049
  18. Kazemi, M., Ghoroneh, H., Kazemi, N., & Babakiraad, A. (2018). Studying the concepts and basics of backcasting and comparing it with forecasting and visioning. Future study Management29(114), 16-37. [in Persian]
  19. Khodadad Hosseini, S. H., Lashkarbolouki, M., & Farrokhi, F. (2013). Alternative approaches for strategy designing in uncertain conditions: An analytical-comparative approach. Public Management Researches, 5(18), 45-63. https://doi.org/10.22111/jmr.2013.1015 [in Persian]
  20. Moeini, S. M., & Zarrin, S. (2006). 40 Years history of Tehran’s urban planning. SHAHRNEGAR, 36, 29-33. [in Persian]
  21. Nasiri, M. R., Jabalameli, M. S., & Aliahmadi, A. (2019). The comprehensive scenario planning model with a forecasting approach. Defensive Future Studies4(12), 7-37. [in Persian] https://doi.org/10.22034/dfsr.2019.36254
  22. Neuvonen, A., & Ache, P. (2017). Metropolitan vision making–using backcasting as a strategic learning process to shape metropolitan futures. Futures86, 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.10.003
  23. Norton, R. K. (2008). Using content analysis to evaluate local master plans and zoning codes. Land Use Policy, 25(3), 432-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2007.10.006
  24. Quist, J., & Vergragt, P. (2006). Past and future of backcasting: The shift to stakeholder participation and a proposal for a methodological framework. Futures38(9), 1027-1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.02.010
  25. Robinson, J. (2003). Future subjunctive: Backcasting as social learning. Futures, 35(8), 839-856. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00039-9
  26. Robinson, J. B. (1982). Energy backcasting: A proposed method of policy analysis. Energy Policy, 10(4), 337-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-4215(82)90048-9
  27. Robinson, J. B. (1990). Futures under glass: A recipe for people who hate to predict. Futures, 22(8), 820-842. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(90)90018-D
  28. Saghafi, F., Aliahmadi, A., Ghazinoori, S. S., & Hourali, M. (2014). Achieving the desired future e-government services of Iran based on the backcasting. Iranian Journal of Management Sciences9(34), 125-144. [in Persian]
  29. Sandström, C., Kanyama, A. C., Räty, R., Sonnek, K. M., Nordström, E. M., Mossing, A., & Nordin, A. (2020). Policy goals and instruments for achieving a desirable future forest: Experiences from backcasting with stakeholders in Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics, 111, 102051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102051
  30. Secretariat of Iran’s Supreme Council for Planning and Architecture. (2016). Urban planning and architecture regulations and development and construction plans approved by Iran’s Supreme Council for Planning and Architecture. University of Tehran Press. [in Persian]
  31. Tehran’s Institution of Studies and Preparation of Urban Development Plans. (2007). Main Document of Tehran's Strategic-structural (Comprehensive) Plan. Iran’s Supreme Council for Planning and Architecture. [in Persian]
  32. Timilsina, R. R., Nakagawa, Y., & Kotani, K. (2020). Exploring the possibility of linking and incorporating future design in backcasting and scenario planning. Sustainability, 12(23), 9907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239907
  33. Vergragt, P. J., & Quist, J. (2011). Backcasting for sustainability: Introduction to the special issue. Technological Forecasting and Social Change78(5), 747-755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.03.010
  34. Zaleckis, K., Grazuleviciute Vileniske, I., Vitkuviene, J., Tranaviciutė, B., Dogan, H. A., Sinkiene, J., & Grunskis, T. (2019). Integrating content analysis into urban research: Compatibility with sociotope method and multimodal graph. SAGE Open, 9(1), 2158244019840115. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019840115
  35. Zammit, A. (2017). Unlocking policy documents: Policy analysis in urban design. In: Carmona, M. (Ed.) Explorations in Urban Design: An urban design research primer (pp. 137-148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315581606