The Role of NGOs Specialized in Urban Planning on Increasing Citizen Participation using Participatory Action-Research in Eghbal and Emamieh Neighborhoods of Mashhad

جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری

Volume 10, Issue 4 - Serial Number 23, March 2024, Pages 1-18   

Document Type: Case study

DOI: 10.22067/jgusd.2022.73722.1139

Authors

Arezoo Alikhani¹; Seyed Mahdi Khatami^{* 2}; hashem dadashpoor³

¹خراسان رضوی - مشهد - بلوار پیروزی ۸۱- برسلانی ۲ پلاک ۷۰ واحد ۸

²Assistant Professor of Urban Planning, Faculty of Art and Architecture,, Tarbiat Modares University

³Urban Planning department, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Extended Abstract

Introduction

It has been highly emphasized on citizen participation and many efforts have been made to use it in Iran, but since people in many situations remain inactive and do not interfere in urban affairs due to such issues as the lack of awareness and trust. That is, people stay silent about the wrong decisions made on the urban environment, so they do not participate effectively. But, intermediary institutions should intervene to make citizens aware of the related issues. Those organizations that are specialized in urban planning can fill this gap and play a significant role in developing and facilitating participation. This study tried to investigate the role of NGOs expert in urban affairs in the participation of citizens for improving the urban environment at the neighborhood level. So, using action-research method, Chhartabagbeh Institution was chosen as a specialized urban planning NGO. Then its role in enhancing the participation and awareness of residents over two months was explored. The action research was done over the implementation of the qualifying project to the neighborhoods considering spring-welcoming projects in 2017 in Eghbal and Emamieh in Mashhad. Levin action research model was used for this purpose. The statistical population consisted of all residents of the two neighborhoods. The size of the sample in each neighborhood was determined to be more than 10% of its population. The study used observation, in-depth interviews, the opinions on banners, questionnaire, and public disscussions were used in different stages to collect the data. The results that are based on interpretative analysis, showed that NGOs can partially fill the gap of participation and help to improve the relationship between urban management and citizens. It also showed that there are some obstacles in this regard. These problems are mainly related to the weakness of legal mechanisms. Moreover, the presence of intermediate institutions should be taken into account when cooperation projects are designed. The last but not least, appropriate platforms for more partnership, cooperation, and dialogues with the people should be desined.
 
 
 

Method

Taking into account the the principles of the interpretative paradigm, this method of this study possess the characteristics of applied studies. This research tried to offer a solution to enhance people’s participation in urban projects. Participatory action research (PAR) was used as a strategy for this qualitative research and field research. The aim was describing, understanding and changing. The data is anecdotal and the sampling was done considering its purpose and the nature of the research. Therefore, various methods including detailed and semi-structured interviews, taking notes, holding joint meetings, documenting meetings, and audio-recording of the discusions and interviews were applied.

Results

The results showed that NGOs can partially help to fill the gap existing in partnership and to improve the relationship between urban management and citizens. It also showed that there are some obstacles in this regard. One of the main problems is related to the weakness of legal mechanisms. Moreover, it seems a must to take into account intermediary institutions when designing partnership-based projects and to offer necessary mechanisms that can enhance the partnership and dialogue with the people.

Discussion and conclusion

It is necessary to implement and evaluate the projects carried out by the NGOs expert in urban planning to familiarize urban planners and designers and local authorities with the improving process and the application method to improve the quality of urban environments for people. Successful implementation of the projects, especially in countries like Iran, can help enhance community-based activities and people's participation in policy-making processes. If properly managed by urban planners and designers, the palns also can ehnance people’s awareness, their participation in the affairs pertaining to their neighborhood, and the sense of belonging to the neighborhood. NGOs’ success in these kinds of projects highly depends on the implementation of short-term policies at the local level, which will be possible if the civil, governmental, and private organizations intervine and the existing structures for locating be considered. The projects shoul be implemented in such a way that after the NGOs’ interventions, their impact on the residents and managers remain for a long time, and additionally, increase the motivation of the members of NGOs who work voluntarily. From this perspective, this study can as one of the first investigations that systematically does such measures seems to be effective.
This study faced som limitations, among of which are the qualitative analysis of the framework criteria developed by experts and local authorities. Doing a quantitative study on the residents can help validating the criteria. Among the limitations that may have impacted on the reliability of the framework at different scales and the type of projects (formal vs. informal), are the limited number and small scale of this project. Yet, another limitation related to the continuous evaluation is that if the projects create the desired imapcts or unexpected side effects, and if they are accepted widely enough by the  communities that they try to improve. Taking into account the mentioned limitations, conducting continuous studies and transforming practical experiences to theoretical considerations seems to be necessary to fill the gap between theory and practice. Moreover, conducting evaluative studies on such projects after the implementation and evaluating their efficiancy will contribute to the theoretical knowledge of practical experiences and subsequent effective actions.

Keywords

Action Research; NGOs; Mashhad Metropolis; Participation

References

1. اسلامی­تنها، ا.، کرم اللهی، ن.ا. (1394). روش تحقیق اقدام پژوهی در علوم اجتماعی. پژوهش در علوم انسانی، 6(2)، 40-27.
2. ایمان، م.ت. (2018). روش شناسی تحقیق کیفی. تهران: پژوهشکده حوزه و دانشگاه.
3. زرقانی، س.، و حجازی جوشقانی، م. (1394). ارزیابی تاثیر مولفه های سرمایه اجتماعی بر تمایل به مشارکت اعضای شورای اجتماعی محلات مشهد. جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری، 2(2 (پیاپی 3) )، 105-121.
4. سامانپور، ف.، برکپور، ن.، مقصودی، م.، (۱۳۹۷). خدمات داوطلبانه دانشگاهی در محیط فرارشته ای؛ گزارش یک اقدام پژوهی در شهرسازی. فصلنامه مطالعات میان رشته ای در علوم انسانی، ۱۱(۱)، ۳۳-۶۴.

 

5. Abelsona, J., Forest, P. G., Eyles, J., Casebeer, A., Martin, E., & Mackean, G. (2007). Examining the role of context in the implementation of a deliberative public participation experiment: Results from a Canadian comparative study. Social Science & Medicine,64, 2115-2128.
6. Arnstein S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners (JAIP), 35 (4), 216-224.
7. Barnes, M. (1992). Introducing new stakeholders: User and researcher interests in evaluative research. A discussion of methods used to evaluate the Birmingham community care special action project. Policy and Politics, 21, 47—58.
8. Beresford, P. (1992). Researching citizen involvement: A collaborative or colonizing enterprise? In M. Barnes & B. Wistow (Eds.), Researching user involvement. Leeds: Nuffield Institute for Health Service Studies, University of Leeds.
9. Brownill, S. (2009). The dynamics of participation: Modes of governance and increasing participation in planning. Urban Policy and Research, 27 (4), 357-375.
10. Connelly, S. (2010). Participation in a Hostile State: How do Planners Act to Shape Public Engagement in Politically Difficult Environments? Planning Practice and Research,25(3), 333-351.
11. Conrad, E., Cassar, L. F., Christie, M., & Fazey, I. (2011). Hearing but not listening? A participatory assessment of public participation in planning. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29, 761-782.
12. Del Gaudio, C., Franzato, C., & de Oliveira, A.J. (2016). Sharing design agency with local partners in participatory design. International Journal of Design, 10(1), 53-64.
13. Dolors, M., Ramon, G., Otiso, K. M., Martin, Š. (2018). City profiles editor international editorial board CRoC editorial board printed in the Netherlands. Cities, 23(6).
14. Forester, J. (2006). Making participation work when interests conflic; Moving from facilitating dialogue and moderating debate to mediating negotiations. American Planning Association,72 (4), 447-456.
15. Friedmann, J. (2005). Globalization and Emerging Culture of Planning.Progress in Planning, 64, 183-234.
16. Gaventa, J., & Valderrama, C. (1999).Participation, Citizenship and Local Governance. Background Note Prepared for Workshop on ‘Strengthening Participation in Local Governance’. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies (IDS).
17. Gordon, E., Schirra, S., & Hollander, J. (2011). Immersive planning: A conceptual model for designing public participation with new technologies. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,38, 505-519.
18. Henderson, D. (1995). Consciousness raising in participatory research: Method and methodology for emancipatory nursing inquiry. Advances in Nursing Science, 17, 58-69.
19. Hung, H. (2015). Governance of built-heritage in a restrictive political system: The involvement of non-governmental stakeholders. Habitat International, 50, 65–72.
20. Khan, S., & Swapan, M. S. H. (2013). From blueprint master plans to democratic planning in South Asian Cities: Pursuing good governance agenda against prevalent patron-client networks.Habitat International, 38, 183-191.
21. King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. (1998). The question of participation: Toward authentic public participation in public administration. Public Administration Review, 58 (4), 317-326.
22. Laurian, L. & Shaw, M. M. (2009). Evaluation of public participation; the Practices of Certified Planners. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28, pp. 293-309.
23. Michels, A. (2011). Innovations in democratic governance: how does citizen participation contribute to a better democracy? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77 (2), 275-293.
24. Ndezi, T. (2009). The limit of community initiatives in addressing resettlement in Kurasini ward, Tanzania. Environment and Urbanization, 21(1), 77–88.
25. Park, P. (1992). The discovery of participatory research as a new scientific paradigm: Personal and intellectual accountability. The American Sociologist, 23, 29-42.
26. Street, A. (Ed.). (1995). Establishing a participatory action research group. Nursing replay: Research nursing culture together (Vol. 1, pp. 59—78). Melbourne: Churchill Livingstone.
27. Stringer, E. (1996). Action research: A handbook for Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
28. Williams, G. (2004). Evaluating participatory development: Tyranny, power and (re)politicisation. Third World Quarterly, 25(3), 557-578.
29. Yang, K., & Pandey, S. K. (2011). Further dissecting the black box of citizen participation: When does citizen involvement lead to good outcomes? Public Administration Review, 71 (6), 880-892.
30. Yetano, A., Royo, S., & Acerete, B. (2010). What is driving the increasing Presence of Citizen Participation Initiatives? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28, 783-802.